Doug, Interesting suggestion, thanks!
A screen can easily contain ~ 50x30 cells, which is too many if I want to have cells as text controls. So I think I will resort to a big canvas instead of a table of cells. But I think I will use the approach that you proposed for row/column controls (buttons). Regards, Dmitry On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 11:15 PM, Doug Williams <m.douglas.willi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Another alternative might be to make a visible grid of cells (using > table-panel, for example) and rather than scrolling the canvas they are on, > use the scroll bars to change what data is displayed in those cells. That > is, have the visible grid of cells be a window into the (potential much > larger) grid of cell contents. > > Doug > > > On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 7:24 PM, Greg Hendershott <greghendersh...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> > Also I saw a lot of scrollable things in Windows who were >> > longer than 32768 pixels (take big Excel tables, for example). >> > Maybe they are implemented in a different way. >> >> I don't think that a big-grid GUI application like Excel will use >> controls for very much in its main window. Generally it is managing >> all that itself. >> >> It might use a _few_ plain windows, such as one for the column names >> on top, another for the row names on the left, and then a big one for >> the main grid client area. Just to make it easier to clip output. >> >> If the user clicks in a button-like area, it will handle that itself. >> e.g. If you click somewhere in the column header, it will calculate >> which column, and draw that column as selected. >> >> If the user clicks in a region it calculates to be a cell, it _might_ >> create a text-edit control there for in-place editing -- but just >> temporarily, and destroy it when editing finishes. >> >> All the logic for scrolling... managed itself. >> >> At least, that's how I did Windows GUI stuff like this, 15+ years ago. >> Usings hundreds or thousands of windows/controls was just too much >> overhead to get desirable speed and space. Although the overhead might >> be less, now, I imagine if you want a really crisp UI it's probably >> much the same story. >> ____________________ >> Racket Users list: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/users > > ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
