On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 22:16:10 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
> * Carsten Haitzler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-01-21 10:14:15 +1100]:
>
> > On Mon, 20 Jan 2003 16:55:17 -0600 [EMAIL PROTECTED] babbled:
> >
> > > I was just curious about why the font path functions are
> > > evas_object_font_path_*() instead of evas_font_path_*(), since they take
> > > an evas (not an object) and they apply evas-wide.
> > > Its not the biggest problem, just a little less than intuitive.
> >
> > very good question. well the reason was that they are specific to objects
> > only(text objects in this case)... hmmm but a good point. should i change
> > them... hmmmmmmmm????????
>
> although i have a slight contention with the current name, i'm not really
> sure. it sort of makes sense both ways. changing it would require fixing all
> evas programs that use fonts... not hard, but possibly annoying. then again,
> if a change is ever to occur, better now than later....
> too complicated...
yes.. if renaming is to happen.. NOW is the time. i don't want duplicate fn
calls for "compatability" i'd like to keep it simple. i'd prefer to make people
have to change their code than add #defines or compat symbols (at this stage)
but is this warranting a change? that is the question... i'll be happy with a
vote of some sort. i'm of 2 minds so i the event on indecision i'll do nothing.
if enough peolpe think its worth a change.. change it shall.
--
--------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" --------------------
The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile Phone: +61 (0)413 451 899 Home Phone: 02 9698 8615
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by:
SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See!
http://www.vasoftware.com
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
