Kalle Vahlman wrote: > 2007/6/13, Yevgen Muntyan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Kalle Vahlman wrote: >> > 2007/6/13, Matthias Clasen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> >> GtkBuilder is just setting the name that was specified in the xml, so >> >> it is not violating the principle that the widget name belongs to the >> >> app/user, since >> >> the xml is part of the app. >> >> >> >> And widget isn't part of the app? Such separation is meaningless for >> purpose of answering the question "should we change code of given >> widget if we want the widget to be usable with GtkBuider?" >> >> So, if a widget sets its name to modify its style, then >> it's broken? Even if the style is essential part of its functionality? >> E.g. text cursor color is not something fancy, it's an essential part >> of text widget and it rather sucks if cursor is invisible because of >> wrong styles. Saying "it's broken because it is somehow >> not a part of application" just doesn't make sense. > > So let's see, the things that make up a "style" in gtkrc are colors > and style properties. Any special-casing above (or rather below) that > is up to the theme engine and thus can't really be trusted. Colors are > grouped by functionality into fg, bg, base and text (as well as the > various computed colors from those). Those have clear meanings, and > should provide enough distinct colors for most widgets. If not, you > must rely on custom style properties and accept that it might not > match the theme. There is no way around this (other than calculating > the color, but that might be less than pleasing visually). > > If a widget goes bonkers because a style property had the default > value, maybe the default value should be made more sensible?
Until gtk-2.12 there was no API to set cursor color. Try a textview with black background and black cursor and you'll see what I'm talking about ;) Try to get tooltips yellow color from a theme, without using "gtk-tooltips" name. And of course those custom style properties won't match theme, why would one change them otherwise? Thing is, sometimes you do need to change those style properties, and it is *not* something wrong or evil. > >> > Furthermore, if my (admittedly quick) glance over how the object names >> > are handled is not misguided, GtkBuilder sets the name once and never >> > checks it again. It has an internal hash table in which it stores the >> > id in the xml and all lookups use that instead of referring to the >> > actual name. >> > >> > So even if GtkBuilder sets the initial name to what is in the xml, you >> > should be able to change it afterwards to whatever you like without >> > everything going bork bork. >> > >> >> I said already what could be a problem. get_widget_by_name() >> is irrelevant. > > You said that matching the widgets in gtkrc would be a problem and in > the part that you didn't include here I told you it's not: > > "A quick test shows that I can indeed match my widget by the fancy name > I gave it in the code in a gtkrc, while the lookup returns the correct > object with the xml id." > > Did I miss something obvious here? Or did you? > Set widget name in constructor or init(), then create this widget with GtkBuilder. Yeah, "semi-broken". Yevgen _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
