On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, John Levon wrote:
[...]
> Let me get specific. I have a button in Citation, "Add", that should
> be enabled if the doc is read-write, disabled if not. However, there
> is *also* the rule that it should *not* be enabled if there is no
> selection in the available-citations listb
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, John Levon wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
> >
> > > That's what the input checking routine is for.
> > >
> > > The fact that an input has changed isn't significant. The problem is
> > > whether or not that change has
On 05-Apr-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> You could emit a signal whenever the user clicks in a new paragraph. That way
> we wouldn;t need an update button at all.
>
> Or is this too easy?
Well we don't want to update the paragraph-layout when we change paragraph
otherwise we are not able to appl
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > That's what the input checking routine is for.
> >
> > The fact that an input has changed isn't significant. The problem is
> > whether or not that change has resulted in a valid contents of the dialog
> > or not.
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Thursday 05 April 2001 07:31, Allan Rae wrote:
> > BTW, what happens if after the user presses a key they then try to press
> > Okay? If the last key press in the edit box gave an invalid entry then
> > they shouldn't have an Okay button available.
>
On Thursday 05 April 2001 08:41, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> On 05-Apr-2001 Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > - outputs_[INITIAL] = CLOSE;
> > + outputs_[INITIAL] = OKAY | APPLY | CLOSE;
> >
> > This should be a safe change for both these policies. It'd also mean that
> > after a Restore you can still
On Thu, 5 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
> That's what the input checking routine is for.
>
> The fact that an input has changed isn't significant. The problem is
> whether or not that change has resulted in a valid contents of the dialog
> or not. If the contents are valid then Okay and Apply sho
On Thursday 05 April 2001 05:47, Allan Rae wrote:
> > Yes, this is a fudge to a lacking ButtonPolicy. Consider inputting a
> > citation-inset from the minibuffer. The params are perfectly valid, the
> > dialog pops up. Do you want to "Apply" them? Yes I do!
>
> Doesn't the citation inset already
On Thursday 05 April 2001 07:31, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > > 7) I find it a bit weird that I call a method "valid(bool)" whenever
> > > > e.g. a user types another character in a line edit widget. Can we
> > > > ad
On 05-Apr-2001 Allan Rae wrote:
> - outputs_[INITIAL] = CLOSE;
> + outputs_[INITIAL] = OKAY | APPLY | CLOSE;
>
> This should be a safe change for both these policies. It'd also mean that
> after a Restore you can still press Okay or Apply without changing
> something in the dialog.
>
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > 7) I find it a bit weird that I call a method "valid(bool)" whenever
> > > e.g. a user types another character in a line edit widget. Can we
> > > add another method mutated(bool) or changed(bool) possibly ?
> >
Also sprach Allan Rae:
} On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
}
} > No, your right. But the thing isn't sophisticated enough to deal with it yet.
} > Allan has been muttering that he's got some improvements up his sleeve.
}
} I have to get them compiling first, and then I can try to transfe
On Wed, 4 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> No, your right. But the thing isn't sophisticated enough to deal with it yet.
> Allan has been muttering that he's got some improvements up his sleeve.
I have to get them compiling first, and then I can try to transfer them
to the new scheme and get th
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Angus, I know you were going to reimplement the input checking functions
> > of the dialogs to return an SMInput but this doesn't seem to have been
> > done yet.
>
> E. Yes it has. Look at FormBase::InputCB rather than
> FormBaseDeprecated::inputC
No, your right. But the thing isn't sophisticated enough to deal with it yet.
Allan has been muttering that he's got some improvements up his sleeve.
So, as a work around...
Alternatively, if you would like an intellectual challenge...
A
On Wednesday 04 April 2001 15:06, John Levon wrote:
> O
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> I think that this is exactly what Kalle was talking about this morning, no?
>
> Why not just not pass this operation though the (button) controller at all.
> Ie, this is a "manipulation" rather than an "input". The Apply/Ok buttons
> will not change s
> I actually have another problem/request: we need to share management of
buttons
> between the controller and the dialog.
>
> for exapmle, the citation dialog has "Add" "Remove" buttons which obviously
should be
> disabled when readonly etc. Unfortunately the dialog also has some say in
when
> btw, Angus, am I ok to change the TabCreate controller to access
setParams(uint, uint)
> ? The dialogs have no business knowing that the rows, cols are represented
as "rows cols"
> string in the Dispatch
Of course.
A
On Tue, 3 Apr 2001, Allan Rae wrote:
> John, don't change the valid() function name or add another one. Wait
> for Angus or I to change the operation of the dialogs input checking.
> Then you won't need those direct calls to bc().valid() just to workaround
> a mishandled input routine.
>
> All
My apologies; I was getting confused. I don't actually use
ButtonController::valid(bool) to change the state of the buttons anymore.
FormBase::InputCB calls ButtonController::input direct.
> Angus, I know you were going to reimplement the input checking functions
> of the dialogs to return an
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > 7) I find it a bit weird that I call a method "valid(bool)" whenever
> > e.g. a user types another character in a line edit widget. Can we
> > add another method mutated(bool) or changed(bool) possibly ?
> > This would make at least the KDE frontend cod
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Why don't you submit a patch for all this? I'm a bit busy this week.
I will, thought it best to run by you ;)
thanks
john
--
"You see things; and you say `Why?' But I dream things that never
were; and I say `Why not?'"
- George Bernard Shaw
On Monday 02 April 2001 14:12, John Levon wrote:
> I'm about to commit a patch to update the KDE frontend
> to MVC for everything, whilst doing it I came across some things :
>
> 1) Warning :
> - , okay_(0), apply_(0), cancel_(0), undo_all_(0)
> + , okay_(0), apply_(0), undo_all_(0), canc
On Mon, 2 Apr 2001, John Levon wrote:
> 3) Segfault: worryingly this might be a kernel thing. If you do tabcreate->OK, then
>tabcreate->OK
> again, *boom* :/
I can't reproduce this one today ...
john
--
"You see things; and you say `Why?' But I dream things that never
were; and I say `Why n
I'm about to commit a patch to update the KDE frontend
to MVC for everything, whilst doing it I came across some things :
1) Warning :
diff -u -r1.3 ButtonController.h
--- src/frontends/controllers/ButtonController.h2001/03/30 16:42:54 1.3
+++ src/frontends/controllers/ButtonControl
25 matches
Mail list logo
