On Tue, Nov 16, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Bruno Dilly <bdi...@profusion.mobi> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:48 AM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> <barbi...@profusion.mobi> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 14, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Viktor Kojouharov
>> <vkojouha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> That doesn't seem right.
>>>
>>> elm_gengrid_item_data_set effectively calls elm_widget_item_data_set, which
>>> sets the data in Elm_Widget_Item->data, whereas the data that is passed to
>>> all the append|prepend functions is stored in Elm_Gengrid_Item->func.data.
>>> To me, they look like totally different places, unless I'm missing
>>> something.
>>
>> there are 2 data. One for the item as a whole, and another to be given
>> to the func callback that is called when item is selected.
>>
>> Usually, they are the same, or the first contains the second, as you
>> need to delete the second when the item dies.
>>
>> As raster and others said, you're likely trying to do a strange thing.
>> You have 3 steps for genlist/gengrid:
>> - view death (use evas_object_event_callback_add with EVAS_CALLBACK_DEL)
>> - item unrealize (use evas_object_smart_callback_add with "unrealized")
>> - item death (use item_del_cb_set[1])
>>
>> The first one is called more than unrealize, because when item is
>> updated it may destroy the existing view and create a new one,
>> repopulating it with new labels, icons and state.
>>
>> The second is called whenever the object goes off screen and thus is
>> not necessary anymore, the container widget (genlist/gengrid) may
>> choose a point to kill the view to save memory. Right now this is
>> immediate, but may be changed in future to reduce deletion/creation of
>> items.
>>
>> The third one is, for some weird reason, not available. I really don't
>> know/remember why there are no
>> elm_{gengrid,genlist}_item_del_cb_set(). Similarly to others it would
>> be a simple wrapper around elm_widget_item_del_cb_set(). I'll wait
>> for dudes at ProFUSION (bdilly? tiagofalcao?) to refresh my memory and
>> tell why we did not add them, or if we just forgot and they should be
>> added.
>
> I'm enjoying something else today.
>
> But looking quickly at these widgets code, looks like func.del is
> intended for use when items are deleted.
> I believe these item classes stuff was added
> before then widget_item generalization, so maybe we can remove
> func.del and use del_cb_set?
> Or am I missing something and they are intended to be used under
> different circumstances?
>
> If you need to add del_cb_set urgently, use the attached patch.
Damn it! I knew there was something different about them, it was the
Item class' del.
Raster, do you think it is better to add an item_del_cb_set and remove
class' del? Or keep the way it is?
BTW, why do we use char* for labels? Having to strdup is quite bad,
particularly when most of your strings are stringshared by other parts
of EFL.
--
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
http://profusion.mobi embedded systems
--------------------------------------
MSN: barbi...@gmail.com
Skype: gsbarbieri
Mobile: +55 (19) 9225-2202
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports
standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 & L3.
Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great
experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today
http://p.sf.net/sfu/msIE9-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
enlightenment-devel mailing list
enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
