Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On 13.05.2010 22:09, Quentin Sculo wrote: Ok, the attached patch should address all your comments. Committed. Thanks again! I forgot to ask, is there a better way to comment the signal callbacks ? I only found "=for position post_signals", though it's not so bad in this case because these ar

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 16:24 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > • The argument list of gtk2perl_offscreen_coord_translate_marshal is > indented with a mix of tabs and spaces. We usually use spaces only for > these kinds of indentations. Also, the spacing around parens is not > consistent in thi

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 18:50 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > On 13.05.2010 18:25, Quentin Sculo wrote: > > gdk_window_set_user_data (widget->window, widget); > > > > I don't think there is a way to get the address of widget in perl. > > ( no luck with get_pointer ) > > There is: Glib::Object::ge

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On 13.05.2010 18:25, Quentin Sculo wrote: gdk_window_set_user_data (widget->window, widget); I don't think there is a way to get the address of widget in perl. ( no luck with get_pointer ) There is: Glib::Object::get_pointer(). But note that when you call get_pointer() on a Gtk2::Widget, you

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 16:24 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: Thanks for the review, I'll make the change. > > One thing I'm wondering, I've used > > $offscreen->set_user_data($self->window->get_user_data); > > to "attach" the offscreen window to its widget (so that the widget > > receive the expo

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On 12.05.2010 01:22, Quentin Sculo wrote: The first patch change the way damage events are blessed, they were blessed as Gtk2::Gdk::Event::Damage but it doesn't have the ->area method. Damage events are really just expose events. Similar cases in Gtk2::Gdk::Event use a common package and are dist

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 22:21 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > If anyone is looking for a challenge, we also still need bindings for > the offscreen window stuff: The first patch change the way damage events are blessed, they were blessed as Gtk2::Gdk::Event::Damage but it doesn't have the ->area

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 22:21 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > If anyone is looking for a challenge, we also still need bindings for > the offscreen window stuff: I wrote the xs part some time ago, but I couldn't make it work in an example, so I wasn't sure if the xs code worked and left it unfin

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 22:21 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > If anyone is looking for a challenge, we also still need bindings for > the offscreen window stuff: > > • > http://library.gnome.org/devel/gdk/unstable/gdk-Windows.html#gdk-offscreen-window-get-pixmap > • http://library.gnome.org/dev

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Sat, 2010-04-24 at 20:03 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > >> 2.14 > >> GtkHSV > > > > I wouldn't touch this; it's deprecated, and nobody should ever feel the > > need to use such an ad hoc widget. > > Is it really deprecated? I can't find any mention of this on >

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

If anyone is looking for a challenge, we also still need bindings for the offscreen window stuff: • http://library.gnome.org/devel/gdk/unstable/gdk-Windows.html#gdk-offscreen-window-get-pixmap • http://library.gnome.org/devel/gtk/unstable/GtkOffscreenWindow.html • http://git.gnome.org/browse/g

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On 23.04.2010 12:11, Emmanuele Bassi wrote: 2.14 GtkHSV I wouldn't touch this; it's deprecated, and nobody should ever feel the need to use such an ad hoc widget. Is it really deprecated? I can't find any mention of this on

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

Torsten Schoenfeld writes: > > gtk_widget_get_mapped > gtk_widget_get_realized > gtk_widget_get_requisition Already $widget->mapped etc I think. Even at the C level they look like pointless one-liners! (Or the only value being to step away from direct struct access by ap

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 01:17 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > Here's a list of unwrapped gtk+ API which isn't just C sugar for GObject > properties, i.e. API which we should wrap: filed a bug with the 2.16+2.18 missing API: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=616634 most of the API is

Re: Unwrapped gtk+ API

On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 01:17 +0200, Torsten Schoenfeld wrote: > Here's a list of unwrapped gtk+ API which isn't just C sugar for GObject > properties, i.e. API which we should wrap: > >2.14 > GtkHSV I wouldn't touch this; it's deprecated, and nobody should ever feel the need to u