Hi,
With all the GSEAL()ing of the whole GTK+ api we get
to privatize alot of things which leaves us alot more leeway
in how we can change things under the hood in the future.
However, what we have to play with is still a matter of
basic C code implementation details and not much in
the
Hi,
I've been wanting to write a somewhat trivial patch for
GtkWindow to collapse the GtkOffscreenWindow code completely
as a property of GtkWindow (GtkWindow:offscreen).
The rationale is shamelessly and completely for Glade; here's
our story:
We've been using a hack for the longest time to e
On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 14:44 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-09-04 at 21:37 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > several questions looking at this code,
>
> Sorry it took me a while to answer this mail.
>
> >
> > 1. I may be
On Sat, 2010-09-04 at 22:20 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Also,
>
> 4. AuxInfo still contains x,y, x_set, y_set and code reads them, but
> commit 0d322676dcb06be62329a7d4373c497993509fbd removed set_uposition
> and now there is no way to set these - so they should die, right?
The removed gtk_w
On Sat, 2010-09-04 at 21:37 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> several questions looking at this code,
Sorry it took me a while to answer this mail.
>
> 1. I may be nuts but I really thought set_size_request() could reduce
> a size request below the widget's normal request, back in the da
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 10:59 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Tristan Van Berkom
> wrote:
> > I like this idea alot and as its a trivial patch I might write one
> > up tonight or tomorrow ...
>
> well, it's trivial exce
On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 10:51 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:37 AM, Tristan Van Berkom
> wrote:
> > SPREAD_EVEN is exactly that.. adding extra space between the children as
> > spacing, and there is SPREAD_EXPAND for the other (not s
On Tue, 2010-08-31 at 18:32 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:51 PM, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > With my proposed padding cleanup though that issue goes away:
> >
> > child = g_object_new(TYPE_MYCHILD, "padding", 5, "h-align",
> > GTK_ALIGN_FILL_HORIZONTAL, NULL);
On Mon, 2010-08-30 at 22:07 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> While I'm making trivial comments about wrap box - there's START/END
> in several other enums, rather than BEGIN/END (just look through
> gtkenums.h, wrap box is the only BEGIN)
>
> @GTK_WRAP_BOX_SPREAD_EVEN description says "evenly dist
Oops I sent this privately to Hans earlier without CCing the list.
Forwarded Message
From: Tristan Van Berkom
To: Hans Breuer
Subject: Re: Wrapping Box Container
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:53:53 +0900
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 23:09 +0200, Hans Breuer wrote:
> At 24.08.2010 20
On Tue, 2010-08-24 at 20:20 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Tristan Van Berkom
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 02:42 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > [...]
> >> PS: I've been trying to send this mail all day, at this point f
On Wed, 2010-08-25 at 02:42 +0900, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
[...]
> PS: I've been trying to send this mail all day, at this point from
> several email addresses... I'm dropping the .tgz attachment and will
> follow up with another mail after uploading it somewhere if this emai
A nice way to do it would be to subclass your widget and chain up to
the parent expose
method where needed.
if you need to draw generically on widgets, it wont work for all
widgets (some widgets
can have floating subwindows)... but you can be bold and connect to
the "event" signal
and do something
Greetings,
Last couple weeks I've been working on the height-for-width
cell renderer api and now I have an intelligible branch for review:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/log/?h=native-layout-incubator-2
This branch was created off master and includes a set of
5 or 6 commits (so this branch
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:32 PM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>> Greetings,
>> Last couple weeks I've been working on the height-for-width
>> cell renderer api and now I have an intelligible branch for review:
Greetings,
Last couple weeks I've been working on the height-for-width
cell renderer api and now I have an intelligible branch for review:
http://git.gnome.org/browse/gtk+/log/?h=native-layout-incubator-2
This branch was created off master and includes a set of
5 or 6 commits (so this branch c
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
[...]
>
> [...]
>
>>You don't want your business logic driven by your onscreen widgets
>>haphazardly this way - you need your undo/redo stack to interface with
>>your internal data model - and you want your views to be synchronized
>>to the mod
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Holger Berndt wrote:
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:57:44 +0200 ecyrbe wrote:
>
>> Easy Undo/Redo framework are usually based on Inheritance...
>
> I don't have any statistics, but surely, there are many frameworks
> based on inheritance, and many others that aren't. The
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Martin Nordholts wrote:
> On 06/16/2010 10:01 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
>>
>> Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
>> GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
>> discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Ro
On Mon, Apr 26, 2010 at 6:24 AM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
>>
>> This will be because GtkFrame still does a classic size request,
>> in this case its getting the minimum height for the minimum width
>> o
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>> On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Matthias Clasen
>
>>
>> The intention was to ensure the minimum size in the backwards
>> request mode. A horizont
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Matthias Clasen
> wrote:
>
>> So far, I have found two things that don't seem to work quite right:
>>
>> 1) In testellipsize, when rotating without any ellipsization, the text
>> just 'rotates out' of the
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 4:04 AM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote
>
>> I've managed to get the base feature set of the native-layout
>> branch working and in a usable state.
>
> Tristan, thanks so much for getti
Good morning,
I've managed to get the base feature set of the native-layout
branch working and in a usable state.
By usable I mean: I've been running Glade on the extended
layout branch for the past week and all of the regressions
I've spotted so far have been fixed, I can also run the
Gimp and
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Federico Mena Quintero
wrote:
> Empty containers (well, I just checked GtkBox and GtkTable) will request
> a size of (2 * border_width) if the container is empty.
>
> Shouldn't the requisition be just 0 for such empty containers? Seems
> that this may automaticall
Good morning,
I've managed to get the base feature set of the native-layout
branch working and in a usable state.
By usable I mean: I've been running Glade on the extended
layout branch for the past week and all of the regressions
I've spotted so far have been fixed, I can also run the
Gimp and
On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:45 AM, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 15:18 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
>> I meant that 'height-for-width' is useful, and
>> 'width-for-height' is a bit of gravy on top.
>>
>> That is, "the behavior of text" is useful, the opposite behavior less
>> useful.
>
GtkRequisition*minimum_size,
GtkRequisition*natural_size);
G_END_DECLS
#endif /* __GTK_EXTENDED_LAYOUT_H__ */
/* GTK - The GIMP Toolkit
* Copyright (C) 2010 Openismus GmbH
*
* Author:
* Tristan Van Berkom
*
* This library is free software; you can redistribu
Hello GTK+ Hackers,
Over the last week I've been working on the extended layout patches[0]
which are sitting in the 'native-layout' branch (the original plan is outlined
in Mathias Hasselmann's blog post[1]).
At this point I'd like to share my findings, plans and uncertainties with the
list s
Hey hackers !
This Saturday I wrote a patch[0] that I think can revolutionize
the way we write user interfaces using GTK+, its a short patch for GTK+
but can immensely change how GTK+ can be used; as specially from higher
level bindings.
In a nutshell, GtkComposite is a mechinism that puts Gtk
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 10:55 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
> On Mi, 30.12.2009 21:32, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
>>Particularly point 5, nested transactions; I banged my head around that one
>>for a while and finally did not implement this; my interpretation of
>>nested tran
On Wed, Dec 30, 2009 at 12:48 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
>> Cross-posting to move the discussion to gtk-devel-list. Anybody interested
>> in the topic, please follow up there.
>>
>> On Do, 24.09.2009 19:23, A. Walton wrote:
>>
>>>It's definitely
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 6:52 PM, Shawn Bakhtiar wrote:
[...]
Note that this list is about the development of GTK+ itself, please address
gtk-app-devel-list
or gtk-list in the future for help using the GTK+ apis.
> I'm almost certain, that with glade you would load the xml (containing many
> top l
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Tor Lillqvist wrote:
>> We really need to get our story together here. Either we do our very
>> best to handle late g_thread_init(), or we should fail spectactularly.
>
> Agree 100%.
>
> My own humble opinion is that even GLib (not just GIO) should link to
> -lpth
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Tristan,
>
> On Mon, 2009-11-16 at 14:34 -0200, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>> > Michael wrote:
>> > fact by the threading system ? [ I was never persuaded that glib's
>> > demand to initialize
On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> [...]
>> fact by the threading system ? [ I was never persuaded that glib's
>> demand to initialize threads before any other line of code was remotely
>> reasonable either BTW ;-]
>
Well actually thats
[...]
> fact by the threading system ? [ I was never persuaded that glib's
> demand to initialize threads before any other line of code was remotely
> reasonable either BTW ;-]
Its really very simple.
Consider that GTK+ is thread aware - that means that the GTK+ code is
littered with calls to g_m
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 1:10 PM, John Ralls wrote:
>
> On Nov 10, 2009, at 4:16 AM, Paul Davis wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Jack Skellington wrote:
>>
Guys,
I just wanted to take this ridiculously appropriate opportunity to
congratulate
you on the great improvements on the OSX
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Andrew Paprocki wrote:
> 2009/11/4 Sven Herzberg :
>> In my opinion the GTK+ way is really nice (just compare it to GStreamers
>> element factory, which behaves essentially the same way, just as
>> GnomeCanvas' gnome_canvas_item_new() function). It's really nice to
On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Brian J. Tarricone wrote:
> On 09/28/2009 06:11 PM, Allin Cottrell wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if the solution Morten advocates -- namely, applying
>> the GSEAL principle internally -- is the best one, although maybe
>> it is.
>
> It's not even necessary. Gtk can acc
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Robert
> Staudinger wrote:
> [...]
>> It seems we are looking at the issues from a different angle.
>
> Yes, which is why I am still here :)
>
Sorry to sound plaintive, I dont wa
On Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 12:09 PM, Robert
Staudinger wrote:
[...]
> It seems we are looking at the issues from a different angle.
Yes, which is why I am still here :)
> I think all gtk should do is expose a DOM that the future CSS
> subsystem can match against. Then there could be a gnome-hig.css t
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 3:34 AM, Robert
Staudinger wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> [...]
[...]
>>
>> Then, the implemented CSS style for an item group would also cover
>> GtkBox, allowing
>> GtkBox to be styled as an itemize
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Robert
Staudinger wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 6:19 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> The idea of theme writers doing something to the first or last item
>> of a GtkBox simply based on it being a GtkBox; is a scary i
On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 4:15 AM, Robert
Staudinger wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> An example of the backwardness we have in place, is that,
>> IMO its simply wrong to assume the role of a GtkToolbar in a
>> given ap
Hi,
I think its really exciting that you guys are working
on this, so I stole the time this morning to share in the fun...
I just want to throw out some ideas that Im sure are not new,
but I was surprised werent really addressed yet in this thread.
Im really not versed in what can/cant should
On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 2:45 AM, Robert
Staudinger wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Keith Rarick wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> What you describe addresses the separation of semantic structure from
>> presentation, but that approach is far more powerful if the semantic
>> information is sufficientl
On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Matthias
Clasen wrote:
[...]
> GTK+ 2.18:
> - SexyUrlLabel functionality has been integrated
> - GtkInfoBar has been added
> - CSW branch has been merged
> - Extended geometry management did not land. I've spent a few days on
> updating and reviewing those patc
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Sam Thursfield wrote:
> Hello!
> I'm doing Summer of code work integrating Gtk+ and the awesome
> gsettings. This includes adding a bunch of stuff to GLADE to make
> binding widgets to settings easy. This can already be done in code
> using g_settings_bind, but nobo
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Sven Neumann wrote:
[...]
>
> I haven't tried this, but unless I am mistaken this should reverse the
> order of children in a box. Seems easy enough to do and avoids the need
> to introduce yet another special case in the GtkBox code. Perhaps if
> this solution is n
On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 7:18 AM, Davyd Madeley wrote:
[...]
>
> In general though, GtkOrientable already exists. People are bound to use
> it.
>
An example use case of this would be a custom toolbar that could be
placed optionally on top or on the side of the workspace where the tool
ordering is r
On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Stef Walter wrote:
> A while back [1] I tackled the possibility of having GtkEntry store it's
> text in a application configurable memory buffer. This makes GtkEntry
> very useful for use with gnome-keyring and seahorse passwords/secrets [2].
>
> I've given it ano
On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 5:16 PM, Michael Natterer wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-02-20 at 16:03 -0500, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Christian Dywan
>> wrote:
>> > Am Fri, 20 Feb 2009 20:25:54 +0100
>> > schrieb Torsten Schoenfeld :
&g
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
[...]
> + GTK+ 2.16 status (mclasen)
> - new API has been merged
> - still missing: GtkActivatable (may be ready for next week)
Sorry I missed the last meeting, is there anything you need me
to do for GtkActivatables ?
Cheers,
[...]
>> > > > > If the base classes can now already do everything then shouldn't the
>> > > > > V/H
>> > > > > classes be deprecated already?
Gtk[VH]Foo deprecation++ from me, yes it should be deprecated if it doesnt
serve a purpose - hardcoding the orientation IMO does not serve a
purpose at al
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:55 AM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Yu Feng wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> If GtkRange were a gtk container perhaps using gtk_container_xxx
On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Yu Feng wrote:
> Hi,
>
> If GtkRange were a gtk container perhaps using gtk_container_xxx with
> child_properties will be an alternative. GtkContainer also has bettern
> granularity - the programmers can modify/remove each marker
> individually.
>
> Unfortunately i
2009/1/6 Matthias Clasen :
> Over the Christmas vacation, I spent a day adding marks to scales. The
> motivation for this came from the new sound preferences capplet, which
> uses a GtkHScale for balance control. Jon did a nice job of adding
> Left/Right labels (see the screenshot), but what is rea
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:08 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
[...]
> > - a GtkActivatable interface for action proxies (this is important,
> > since it is a prerequisite for having
> > good GtkBuilder support in glade3)
[...]
>
> Anyway, I'll fix that crasher this w
On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 12:28 AM, Matthias Clasen
wrote:
> I've received multiple requests from people who really want to use
> some of the new things in trunk in Gnome 2.26. Among the features of
> high interest are
>
> - new status icon api
> - using threads for page rendering when printing
>
2008/8/16 Andrew Cowie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
[...]
> At the very least across the rest of the GNOME stack, but if it's a
> behaviour change we want to encourage not just there but beyond, I
> wonder how could we go about incenting library authors to adopt this
> pattern?
I would expect an author of
On Mon, Jul 14, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Murray Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Every time that a parallel-installable GTK+ 3.0 has been proposed, and
> now that it has been decided, I have asked for a list of actual useful
> features that it will make possible. I've had no luck so far.
>
> We need t
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Peter Clifton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It can be user-data... I've experimented with using libglade to add
> user-defined widgets to a schematic editor's canvas, and a crash / abort
> is NOT what we want when the user hand-edits the XML and makes a
> mistake.
On Dec 6, 2007 3:04 PM, Stefan Kost <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> Xavier Bestel schrieb:
> > On mer, 2007-12-05 at 14:09 +0100, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> >> The only way to make this backwards compatible is to make
> >> libgtk-2.0.so.0 have the deprecated symbols and link to
> >> libgtk-no-c
On Nov 24, 2007 2:54 PM, Mikael Hermansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Just wondering when will libglade will be deprecated in favor of
> GtkBuilder API? I dont see any news about this on live.gnome.org
>
> atm. I am writing an application using GTKBuilder API and the convert
> scripts
On Wed, 2007-09-26 at 13:08 +0200, Rodrigo Moya wrote:
[...]
> > It seems useful for anything that operates on persistent data, be it
> > a document, or control-center settings.
> >
> I'm thinking, maybe a crazy idea though, but this could also be useful,
> once the actions are stored in a file, to
On Fri, 2007-09-21 at 17:51 +0100, Iain * wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've had an undo framework in Marlin for years now, but recently
> people have been using it in other things (notably Ross in Tasks - ok,
> actually, he's the only one) and we discussed suggesting this for
> inclusion in GTK at some point
On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 13:50 +0200, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-26 at 14:19 +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> > 2007/6/26, Murray Cumming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > libglade's _new() function has a "root" parameter:
> > > http://developer.gnome.org/doc/API/libglade/gladexml.html#GLADE-XML-NE
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 11:55 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> Damon Chaplin wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 11:49 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> >
> >> Anyway, my point here is not wrt code that exists already in Gtk+,
> >> I am of the opinion that GConta
On Thu, 2007-06-14 at 15:32 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> > I think its quite important here to not repeat one of the
> > the most obvious mistakes of glade/libglade, swapping the
> > signal based on the fact that an "object" was specified
> > is confusing - it also rules out the use case of speci
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 13:25 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
[...]
> Let's do something a little cleaner and more flexible;
>
> typedef void (*GtkBuilderConnectFunc) (GtkBuilder *builder,
> const gchar *handler_name,
> GObject
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 10:57 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> > 2007/6/13, Matthias Clasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >> On 6/13/07, Yevgen Muntyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> Widgets which set a name in a constructor are already semi-broken
> anyway. Wid
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 12:13 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
[...]
> Ideally not.
> It seems to me that most of the virtual properties were hacks.
> Preferably the widgets should be fixed upstream instead.
>
> Yes, there are also special cases such as visibility of windows and
> focus/default. I think t
On Wed, 2007-06-13 at 10:44 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> Good morning folks,
[...]
> Can we please not swap signal handlers unless they are
> explicitly specified ?
>
>
>
>
Oops, have to ammend my mistype here, I meant to say:
Good morning folks,
What I really want to discuss in this thread is properties, packing
properties and also more specifically, packing properties on
non-GtkContainer GObjects - I use a custom gtk+ based toolkit that
makes heavy use of delagate GObjects in the widget hierarchy
(objects that define
On Tue, 2007-06-05 at 14:38 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 16:04 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> [..]
> > One thing that might or might not be a can of worms is
> > language bindings. I wonder if someone more experienced
>
On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 23:00 +0300, Markku Vire wrote:
[...]
> But you had a nice idea described in the bug #172535 (to use separate
> get_type attribute in the xml). This technique would save the day if
> the automatic classname => function mapping failed.
>
> The bad thing is that somebody still
On Mon, 2007-06-04 at 16:04 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> One of the problems pointed out by Matthias in the GtkBuilder bug[1] is how
> a third-party library can define a type name mapping to get type function.
>
> First, let me try explain a bit more about the problem;
>
> The types inside a GtkB
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 15:36 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 15:12 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> > Something like this ?
> >
> > GdkPixmap *
> > gdk_pixmap_new_shared (GdkDrawable *drawable,
> > gint
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 15:36 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 15:12 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> > Something like this ?
> >
> > GdkPixmap *
> > gdk_pixmap_new_shared (GdkDrawable *drawable,
> > gint
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 14:40 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 12:20 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>
> > I'm currently considering a hack where I will simply do:
> > - load pixbuf
> > - put the pixbuf in a GdkImage (GdkImage already us
Hi,
For a project I'm working on I'm trying to get GdkPixmaps to in fact
be XShmPixmaps when displaying the app on an X server running locally.
This has the advantages of:
- Reduced ipc with the xserver (since the graphics are stored in
a shared memory segment) - thus less task switches
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 14:57 +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
[...]
> I'm not exactly sure what you want the board to consider. The plan is
> not "let companies develop GTK+ and hope everything will go well", but
> "tell companies that if they want a better GTK+, this is what they
> should do".
>
> Maybe
On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 23:37 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> hi everyone;
>
> it's been a long while since GTK+ developers held regular (or
> semi-regular) meetings. Tim pointed out on the wiki[1] that someone
> should work on getting the meeting-machine back on by contacting people
> and keeping a
On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 10:10 +0200, Xavier Bestel wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-05-16 at 09:06 +0100, Martyn Russell wrote:
> > > So, right now, the Board is not considering the option of hiring people
> > > to hack/do technical things. I'm not saying "we'll never do this", but
> > > doing this has a lot of
On Tue, 2007-05-15 at 22:29 +0200, Olav Vitters wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 01:08:10AM +0200, Vincent Untz wrote:
[...]
>
> Some comparison...
>
> http://www.trolltech.com/company
> "Trolltech is a software company with two product lines: Qt and Qtopia.
> We currently have 200 employees wor
On Wed, 2007-05-09 at 15:26 +0300, Alberto Mardegan wrote:
> Hi all,
>it seems to me that libglade doesn't support yet GtkSizeGroup and
> other non-GtkWidget objects.
> There's a patch attached to this bug report:
>
> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=161903
>
> but it has not been a
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 12:34 -0500, Michael Lawrence wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am wondering what is happening with GObject introspection. It seems
> that it has been in the works for some time now but that development
> has stalled.
Nod, very interesting project also IMO, unfortunate that we dont have
th
On Tue, 2007-05-01 at 14:41 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
[...]
> > - a markup for building trees of items would certainly be handy, just as
> > glade is handy
>
> Ideally GtkBuilder would support this. Most of the standard items are
> configured with GObject properties. The only issue is that GObj
On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 08:12 +, Benjamin Otte wrote:
[...]
> So what does that mean for a GtkCanvas?
>
> The canvas should make it easy to load the full graphical description from a
> file created by a graphic artist.
[...]
I strongly agree and strongly disagree (which might or might not mean
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:01 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> What do we do?
> > [snip]
> >
> > We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> > problem.
>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:17 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > It might be advantagous if alot of the glib data structures
> > were moved somewhere above libgobject in the stack (glibutils ?),
> > this way they cou
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 22:12 +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> 2007/4/21, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I can tell you the reasons why I usually use a canvas:
> >
> > 1. Writing widgets is _very hard_ (when compared to e.g. canvas
> > items).
>
> Depends on your language
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 12:33 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
>
> I am posting to suggest that glib has crossed a threshold
> of size and functionality and that users would benefit from
> a splitting of the library into two or more separate libraries.
For the record, I dont think glib is oversized or b
On Wed, 2007-04-11 at 21:09 +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
> Hi.
> Has there been any resolution of the matter? People keep bugging me
> about it.
Heh, I'd check my mail client if I was you ;-)
http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2007-April/msg00041.html
Cheers,
-Tristan
_
On Mon, 2007-04-02 at 15:14 -0400, Morten Welinder wrote:
> On 4/2/07, Jakub Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi gtk+ developers.
> > I propose a replacement of the current gtk stock icons with newly
> > created artwork[1].
>
> True or False: if you do so, applications that use the occasiona
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 15:32 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 11:33 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> >
> >> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 10:47 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 11:33 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 10:47 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
[...]
> > We can install our own icons for the corner cases that exist
> > only for our applications
> Um, we can do that only
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 10:47 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
[...]
> I think it is clear that if you use "gtk-foo" icon for "bar" then
> you're misusing it. But let's not forget about the reasons for
> doing it: there may simply be
On Wed, 2007-03-28 at 16:38 +0200, Kristian Rietveld wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 12:49:44PM +0200, Jakub Steiner wrote:
[...]
> The concern which I want to raise, and which I already did in my
> previous mail, is the following: "Does updating icons account as a
> break of backward compatibilit
201 - 300 of 370 matches
Mail list logo
