On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 06:48:43PM +0100, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Font size depends on your pixels per inch setting. If your screen
> resolution is very high fonts can also appear smaller than intended.
>
> Please reply giving me your screen resolution and your estimate of
> font size in
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 03:09:34PM +, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> Yes, of course, C structures can be declared that way, but the fact
> remains that the contents of the ancestor's structure are not merged
> into the heir. This means, to access a member N ancestors deep, one
> has to specify all of
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 01:06:04PM +0100, Edward Bartolo wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Is it possible to use classes and objects while using gtk2/3? I
> noticed that only functions are used and that class use is ovoided by
> prepending functions with a group string. As far as I know, C can
> still use stru
* On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
> In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
GTK and seems to contain many such solutions.
- Nate
--
"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all
p
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 05:49:29AM -0600, Nate Bargmann wrote:
> * On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
> > In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
>
> Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
> GTK and seems to contain many such solutions
Hi Nate,
Yes, i'm taking a look at this.
gtk, glib, atk, cairo, pango, gdk-pixbuf...
Aitor.
On 23/11/15 12:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
GTK and seems to contain many such solutions.
- Nate
__
On 23/11/2015 11:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
* On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
GTK and seems to contain many such solutions.
Using GLib for structures
On 23/11/2015 11:48, Hendrik Boom wrote:
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 01:06:04PM +0100, Edward Bartolo wrote:
Hi All,
Is it possible to use classes and objects while using gtk2/3? I
noticed that only functions are used and that class use is ovoided by
prepending functions with a group string. As far
* On 2015 23 Nov 06:18 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
> Hi Nate,
>
> Yes, i'm taking a look at this.
>
> gtk, glib, atk, cairo, pango, gdk-pixbuf...
Before you guys go too far down the GTK rabbit hole, which will
eventually force you into GTK3, you may want to ponder this:
https://igurublog.wordpress.
Roger Leigh writes:
> On 23/11/2015 11:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
>> * On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
>>> In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
>>
>> Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
>> GTK and seems to contain many such solu
I'd start out by saying that, in my opinion, OOP isn't the right
paradigm for every situation.
If you're talking about a picklist, where you display the picklist and
the user picks the desired item, then I think OOP is a pretty good
paradigm because it matches the data.
In this case, the picklist
On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:45:54 -0500
Hendrik Boom wrote:
> There is a well-known hack in C wheereby you rely on C allocating
> fields of structures independently of later fields.
>
> Thus with
> struct foo{char c, int d, float e,}
> and
> struct bar{char c, int d,}
>
> (forgive me if I need
Steve Litt writes:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:45:54 -0500
> Hendrik Boom wrote:
>> There is a well-known hack in C wheereby you rely on C allocating
>> fields of structures independently of later fields.
>>
>> Thus with
>> struct foo{char c, int d, float e,}
>> and
>> struct bar{char c, int d,
On 23/11/2015 13:50, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
Roger Leigh writes:
On 23/11/2015 11:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
* On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
Have you looked at what glib provides? It is an underlying library of
GTK an
Hi,
I'm using devuan unstable without any issues, but now I found a lot of
packages that cannot be updated because of libdbus-1-3 (>= 1.9.14) that
isn't available.
How should I handle this? I can force the instalation and I think that
it will work anyway, but it is too manual. Is there anything I
On November 23, 2015 6:37:59 PM GMT+01:00, Eloy Espinaco
wrote:
>
>How should I handle this? I can force the instalation and I think that it will
>work anyway, but it is too manual. Is there anything I'm missing here?
Devuan basically works on a blacklist system, where some packages don't com
Hi All,
The backend, in a way, already handles lists. All I need to do is
extract the code and put it in a struct. This 'reinventing of the
wheel' will avoid having to content ourselves with what libraries
offer whatever that may be. With netman, the goal was to avoid as many
dependencies as possi
On 23/11/2015 18:13, Edward Bartolo wrote:
Hi All,
The backend, in a way, already handles lists. All I need to do is
extract the code and put it in a struct. This 'reinventing of the
wheel' will avoid having to content ourselves with what libraries
offer whatever that may be. With netman, the go
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 10:58:47AM -0500, Steve Litt wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2015 06:45:54 -0500
> Hendrik Boom wrote:
>
>
> > There is a well-known hack in C wheereby you rely on C allocating
> > fields of structures independently of later fields.
> >
> > Thus with
> > struct foo{char c, int
Roger Leigh writes:
> On 23/11/2015 13:50, Rainer Weikusat wrote:
>> Roger Leigh writes:
>>> On 23/11/2015 11:49, Nate Bargmann wrote:
* On 2015 23 Nov 00:53 -0600, aitor_czr wrote:
> In my opinion, using C with lists will be the most suitable.
Have you looked at what glib prov
Hi Steve,
I would argue that it's possible a "OOP" development without a OOP language.
The "OOP" development is in the mind of the developer.
Even the OOP languages make it easier, of course...
Cheers :-) ,
Aitor.
On 11/23/2015 04:56 PM, Steve Litt wrote:
I'd start out by saying that, i
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 00:11:12 +0100
aitor_czr wrote:
> Hi Steve,
>
> I would argue that it's possible a "OOP" development without a OOP
> language.
Yes, that's one of the points I was making: You can do it in C.
>
> The "OOP" development is in the mind of the developer.
True, and you never *r
Hi Aitor et al,
What about directly translating the Object Pascal code into C instead
of doing a reimplementation of the logic? I remember, once I had a
Pascal class that took me six months to write which I translated into
C++ within a month. I think, this is the most practical approach.
There ar
Hi All,
That pascal class was horribly written with nested functions down to
four or five levels! Imagine having to translate that without using
nested functions. I worked around by using local classes and passed
parameters with pointers.
Netman's frontend was written without using nested functio
24 matches
Mail list logo
