On 13 January 2014 15:37, Gonzalo Odiard <godi...@sugarlabs.org> wrote:
> Sadly, have more sense set icon_size than pixel_size, right? > (More in the context of multiple pixels resolutions, like we have with the > xo and the desktop) > Well, we should be using the new layout scaling stuff in gtk to deal with different resolutions. http://blogs.gnome.org/alexl/2013/06/28/hidpi-support-in-gnome/ If on the top of that we need to set different "pixel" sizes for icons, it seems like a constant will probably enough. The IconSize stuff was designed to support runtime switching because it was user configurable, and it's now all being deprecated because they don't want the user configurability anymore. In any case gtk is moving away from it, so we will need our own constant or more complex thing. > > I think is better fix Icon to get the parameter and set the pixel_size, > and not do all the modifications Ignacio found. > Why? I think it's pretty clear that Gtk.IconSize will go away in gtk4. It seems a good idea to get rid of it at least in core (and suggest to do the same in activities). It will be less work when it goes away completely. > > In fact, Icon is sugar toolkit code, and do other tricks, > then we don't need deprecate the parameter. > But Gtk.IconSize is not sugar toolkit API. "Use Gtk.IconSize with Icon but not with gtk.Image" seems like a very very confusing thing to suggest to activity authors.
_______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
