On 06/14/13 23:14, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:33 AM, dE wrote:
On 06/14/13 22:09, Chris Vine wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:41:05 +0530
dE wrote:
On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage
On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 18:17 -0700, Andrew Potter wrote:
> That's unusual. Quick testing of my own image resizing does not seem
> to have that occur. If you're sure that your requests are always
> absolutely sane, you might want to put together a small test case as
> it could indicate a pygtk bug, o
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Kip Warner wrote:
> I have three concerns. The first is that sometimes the incoming
> allocation has some very strange width and height values in it, but are
> usually valid the rest of the time. Sometimes I see values like
> width of -408563232 and height of 32767
On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 10:22 +0100, jcup...@gmail.com wrote:
> From a quick look your code ought to work. I've written stuff very
> like this which works fine.
Hey John. Yeah, I'm stumped too.
> I think you'll need to make a complete example I can try running,
> sorry.
Coming up with a minimal f
On Fri, 2013-06-14 at 00:17 -0700, Andrew Potter wrote:
> I suspect something weird is happening because you have the wrong
> function signature. I can't find any reference to the basic widget
> methods on the python gtk documentation website, but the C signature
> is:
>
> voidgtk_
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 23:03:55 +0530
dE wrote:
> On 06/14/13 22:09, Chris Vine wrote:
> > On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:41:05 +0530
> > dE wrote:
> >> On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
> I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execu
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 2:33 AM, dE wrote:
> On 06/14/13 22:09, Chris Vine wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:41:05 +0530
>> dE wrote:
>>>
>>> On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
>
> I was monitoring the memory usage before and
On 06/14/13 22:09, Chris Vine wrote:
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:41:05 +0530
dE wrote:
On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change
On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 21:41:05 +0530
dE wrote:
> On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
> >> I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
> >> g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the
> >> memory usage by a
On 06/14/13 21:14, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 12:23 AM, dE wrote:
On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt
On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
usage by a bit.
Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
What are you moni
On Sat, Jun 15, 2013 at 12:23 AM, dE wrote:
> On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
>>>
>>> I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
>>> g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
>>> usage by
On 06/14/13 17:02, Matthias Clasen wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
usage by a bit.
Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
What are you moni
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 3:27 AM, dE wrote:
> I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
> g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
> usage by a bit.
>
> Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
What are you monitoring, and how ?
It is i normal th
I this is the wrong list, but I am active here... so why not start here
While editing the project C/C++ Build settings I somehow got the window
to shrink horizontally to be a single vertical bar.
If I hit ESC the window closes. The edges won't drag
Anyone seen this before?
Tom
__
On 14 June 2013 07:29, Kip Warner wrote:
> Hey Tristan. I see what you mean, but I think I should have provided
> more code to show that what I was actually doing I think was what your
> followup suggestion was. Namely do some short work, update the GUI, do
> some more short work, repeat.
>
>
On 06/14/13 13:24, Andrew Potter wrote:
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:27 AM, dE wrote:
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
usage by a bit.
Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
e.g. --
gtk_list_s
On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 12:27 AM, dE wrote:
> I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
> g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
> usage by a bit.
>
> Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
>
> e.g. --
> gtk_list_store_clear (store);
> g_objec
I was monitoring the memory usage before and after execution of
g_object_unref and gtk_list_store_clear, and it didnt change the memory
usage by a bit.
Is this normal (am I doing it right?)?
e.g. --
gtk_list_store_clear (store);
g_object_unref( G_OBJECT (store) );
g_object_unref ( G_OBJECT ( c
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 9:54 PM, Kip Warner wrote:
> > What you can do to (try to) prevent that situation is to set the widget to
> > do "height for width" allocation, and override
> > get_preferred_height_for_width() to honor your aspect ratio. In some
> > situations of course the toolkit won't b
20 matches
Mail list logo
