On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 12:00 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> I understand your point of view, you'd like to avoid updating glade again
> to support the new builder.
>
> Until glade is updated, the users will be able use a script to convert from
> the old format to the new format.
I'm afraid it is un
Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
I'm afraid I'll have to take at least one day to better my knowlage about
exactly how GtkAction works, but from the little I already know and my
first glances...
I dont see why the menu items cant be prefabricated with actions
attached,
and the action groups made ava
>
> Yes, these simple cases would be possible to handle somewhat, it would
> prevent you from using the delimiter character in object names, which
> wouldn't be a too big deal.
> However, specifying model data for GtkListStore and GtkTreeStore is not
> really possible using properties, unless you
Hi all,
/me calls mail_thread_join() on this thread...
Nothing wrong with allowing buildable menus or toolbars, but how do
you propose that they should achieve what uimanager does, mainly
separation of ui and actions, and merging of uis ?
Well, the merging of UI's is not very complex, I wo
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 15:55 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Owen Taylor wrote:
>
> >>It's, err, wrong to claim that another piece of soft is perfect, and
> >>make this piece of soft "perfect assuming that's perfect",
> >>and say "is that's not perfect, complain about it, but this piece of
> >>sof
Owen Taylor wrote:
It's, err, wrong to claim that another piece of soft is perfect, and
make this piece of soft "perfect assuming that's perfect",
and say "is that's not perfect, complain about it, but this piece of
soft will still assume that piece of soft is perfect".
Are we living in ideal
Dan Winship wrote:
> Johan Dahlin wrote:
>>> Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
>>> GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
>>> I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
>>> code available for public review.
>>
On Thu, 2006-05-11 at 09:47 -0500, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Johan Dahlin wrote:
>
> >> o My real concern is about supporting menus and toolbars built by
> >>UIManager.
> >>- Is the motivation here only a "time-to-market" thing ?
> >>- If so, do you have any plan or stratagy to take baby-ste
Johan Dahlin wrote:
>> Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
>> GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
>> I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
>> code available for public review.
>>
> I went ahead and at
Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 11:51 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
>
>> We've made a couple of important decisions:
>> * GMarkup based parser which parses and creates the object tree in one step
>> go instead of saprving a whole tree in memory.
>> * breaking xml format compatibility w
>> It'll be fairly easy to add support for this in the signal tag,
>> so you can specify the data argument. It would require two attributes
>> one for the data and one for the type, then you'd do:
>>
>> >data-type="GObject"/>
>>
>> void quit_cb (GtkAction *action, GtkWindow *window);
>>
>
Johan Dahlin wrote:
[snip]
There should be only one obvious way of doing a specific task.
GtkUIManager is the currently the obvious way of creating menus and
toolbars
Here you go, python programmer in action :)
Seriously speaking, GtkUIManager is not and may not be perfect. The
single
>
>I never claimed GtkUIManager was perfect. I just said it was the obvious way
>of creating menus and toolbars. It might be overkill in smaller
>applications, but if they use gtkbuilder they won't even notice.
>
>Johan
>
Probably I've missed something but can someone give a link where a decision
Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 11:51 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
>
>> We've made a couple of important decisions:
>> * GMarkup based parser which parses and creates the object tree in one step
>> go instead of saprving a whole tree in memory.
>> * breaking xml format compatibility w
>> [snip]
>> There should be only one obvious way of doing a specific task.
>> GtkUIManager is the currently the obvious way of creating menus and
>> toolbars
>>
>>
> Here you go, python programmer in action :)
>
> Seriously speaking, GtkUIManager is not and may not be perfect. The
> single fact
Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
Johan Dahlin wrote:
o My real concern is about supporting menus and toolbars built by
UIManager.
- Is the motivation here only a "time-to-market" thing ?
- If so, do you have any plan or stratagy to take baby-steps and
eventually get
all the ui building code in
Morten Welinder wrote:
> When Glade is used with a recent gtk+, it will write lots of
> properties that old gtk+ will not understand. Now if those
> properties were non-default that is unavoidable, but it is
> irritating that one cannot readily edit a glade file on a
> new system without hand-patc
Johan Dahlin wrote:
o My real concern is about supporting menus and toolbars built by
UIManager.
- Is the motivation here only a "time-to-market" thing ?
- If so, do you have any plan or stratagy to take baby-steps and
eventually get
all the ui building code into the IBuildable ?
F
When Glade is used with a recent gtk+, it will write lots of
properties that old gtk+ will not understand. Now if those
properties were non-default that is unavoidable, but it is
irritating that one cannot readily edit a glade file on a
new system without hand-patching using Emacs afterwards.
Ca
Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Johan Dahlin wrote:
>
>>
>>> Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
>>> GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
>>> I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
>>> code available for public r
Kalle Vahlman wrote:
On 5/11/06, Yevgen Muntyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why remove custom properties? They are still needed by applications,
Out of curiosity, for what kind of functionality do _applications_ use
custom properties for? I can understand if they are used in creation
of the
Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> On Thu, 11 May 2006, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
>
>> Johan Dahlin wrote:
>>
Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions
>>> Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
>>> GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
>>> I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
>>> code available for public review.
>>>
>>
>> I went ahead and attached the
> o first of all, GtkBuilder & GtkBuildable is a nice api and seemingly
> covers
>the api that in libglade allowed you to provide a constructor
> function and
>a "build_children" function... this will be important for people to
> port any
>custom libglade extentions that were using the
On Wed, 2006-05-10 at 11:51 -0300, Johan Dahlin wrote:
> We've made a couple of important decisions:
> * GMarkup based parser which parses and creates the object tree in one step
> go instead of saprving a whole tree in memory.
> * breaking xml format compatibility with libglade
> * not supporti
On Thu, 11 May 2006, Yevgen Muntyan wrote:
> Johan Dahlin wrote:
>
> >
> >> Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
> >> GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
> >> I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
> >> c
On 5/11/06, Yevgen Muntyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why remove custom properties? They are still needed by applications,
Out of curiosity, for what kind of functionality do _applications_ use
custom properties for? I can understand if they are used in creation
of the widgets by the loading sy
Johan Dahlin wrote:
Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
code available for public review.
I went ahead and attached the
Johan Dahlin wrote:
Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
code available for public review.
I went ahead and attached the
o One concern I have is about the format, the way it seems... oddball
cases are being
treated by introducing new tags in the format specificly for those
cases. Is there a
reason they cant be handled as properties ?
example:
STRING, INT, INT
entry1, entry2
My feeling
On 5/10/06, Johan Dahlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
HiOver the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working onGtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
code available for public review.This wor
Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
code available for public review.
I went ahead and attached the patch to
http://bugzil
Hi
Over the last couple of weeks Henrique Romano and I have been working on
GtkBuilder, a UI constructor intended for inclusion in GTK+.
I'd like to discuss the API and some of the decisions before making the
code available for public review.
This work has been sponsored by Nokia.
We've made a c
33 matches
Mail list logo