Re: GTK Tree View

2008-06-05 Thread Kristian Rietveld
On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 03:26:33PM -0400, Eric Pastoor wrote: I'm calling the function on the signal connected to row-expand. That's probably one of the problems, since at that point the exact heights and locations aren't known yet (these are calculated in an idle). You might want to use an

calendar in a treeview

2008-06-05 Thread dhk
How can I update a treeview cell with a date selected from a calendar? The cell is a GtkCellRendererText and pops up a calendar with the editing-started signal when it gets focus. Thanks, Dave ___ gtk-app-devel-list mailing list

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Jean-Yves Lefort
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 00:37:00 -0400 Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2008-06-04 at 07:35 -0400, Paul Davis wrote: Basically, something like this: http://doc.trolltech.com/4.4/properties.html When reading this and other Qt documents, one realizes that a large

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Felipe Contreras
On 6/5/08, Jean-Yves Lefort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sure, both systems need some reflection capabilities, which neither C nor C++ support natively. I don't see how this point would debunk the fact that C++ is a more expressive language than C, and that writing an object-oriented

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Kristian Rietveld
Hi, On Wed, Jun 04, 2008 at 05:30:37PM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote: On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 2:37 PM, BJ?rn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Regardless, gtk+ 3.0 is a long-term project, probably with a first release sometime in 2010 or so. Embedded developers wont want to pick it up

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Xavier Bestel
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 08:59 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: [...] Likewise, you can implement a class Foo containing an int property bar using the GObject way: #define G_TYPE_FOO (g_foo_get_type()) #define G_FOO(obj) (G_TYPE_CHECK_INSTANCE_CAST((obj),

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Hubert Figuiere
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 08:59 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: or using the Qt way: class QFoo : public QObject { Q_OBJECT Q_PROPERTY(int bar READ bar WRITE setBar) public: void setBar (int value); int bar () const;

Re: Qt vs. Gtk+ holy war Was: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Christian Dywan
Am Thu, 05 Jun 2008 12:25:02 +0200 schrieb Xavier Bestel [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 08:59 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: Likewise, you can implement a class Foo containing an int property bar using the GObject way: #define G_TYPE_FOO (g_foo_get_type())

Re: Qt vs. Gtk+ holy war Was: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Ross Burton
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 16:16 +0200, Christian Dywan wrote: What about Genie even? [indent=4] uses Glib class Foo : Object init var bar = 0 That doesn't define a property. Ross -- Ross Burton mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Behdad Esfahbod
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 08:59 +0200, Jean-Yves Lefort wrote: Sure, both systems need some reflection capabilities, which neither C nor C++ support natively. I don't see how this point would debunk the fact that C++ is a more expressive language than C, and that writing an object-oriented

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Emmanuele Bassi
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 14:35 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote: I do not say you should violate the code of conduct or whatever. It's nice if everybody is nice and fluffy, yes. But there are also people who are pissed off (that happens), or tired, they should not write to gtk-devel-list, then, and

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Mikael Hermansson
On Thu, 2008-06-05 at 14:35 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote: Say, this Gtk-3.0 idea sucks. It brings nothing to application developers, yet application developers will be effectively forced to migrate to avoid problems. You are doing a disservice to application developers with this. It's a road to

Re: Steps to get to GTK+ 3.0

2008-06-05 Thread Yevgen Muntyan
On Jun 5, 2008, at 14:44 , Johan Dahlin wrote: Yevgen Muntyan wrote: [..] Say, this Gtk-3.0 idea sucks. It brings nothing to application developers, yet application developers will be effectively forced to migrate to avoid problems. You are doing a disservice to application developers with

[no subject]

2008-06-05 Thread Jean-Philippe Chancelier
Hi all, The link at the end of this mail gives an example of Gtk+ code that can be used to redirect standard output to a GtkTextView. I have changed the original code of Claudio Polegato to replace gdk_input_add by g_io_... functions.

Re:

2008-06-05 Thread Chris Vine
On Thu, 05 Jun 2008 10:21:45 +0200 (CEST) Jean-Philippe Chancelier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, The link at the end of this mail gives an example of Gtk+ code that can be used to redirect standard output to a GtkTextView. I have changed the original code of

Re:

2008-06-05 Thread Tor Lillqvist
The code seams to work correctly on Linux No it doesn't, not for me at least. Hangs in the same way. You use a (by default) buffered GIOChannel, and in that case g_io_channel_read_chars() wants to read exactly the number of bytes you ask for. So it blocks waiting for more to be written to

Re: Goo::Canvas updating a PolyLine

2008-06-05 Thread zentara
On Wed, 4 Jun 2008 08:56:14 -0400 zentara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 14:24:51 -0400 zentara [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I'm trying to convert a line-segment (waypoint) generator that I made on a plain Gnome2::Canvas, to the Goo::Canvas. If you want to see a working example,