On 06/07/11 22:29, michael bouchaud wrote: > I would like to clarify that I am very happy with the access > elm_object_part_text_set. I do not question the API the problem is > internal. I thinking about if things would be easier and more efficient, > if we could provide a 'main edje' in elm_widget. And sure keep hooks
Yeah, I understand that. We can potentially provide a "main edje hook" and just let widgets that don't have _text_set_hook use that instead. As I said, you need _text_set_hook because not all the widgets are composed of just one edj group. So really, you'll only need it for some of the widgets and even then... Keep in mind that some of the widgets keep an internal copy of the strings in some cases, which will mean direct edje access is bad. Furthermore, it's generally a bad idea (in my pov) to edit a widget's theme so much that will now contain other "editable" fields, but maybe that's just me. In conclusion, direct access will probably only help with widgets with a single edj group in which you want for some reason to add a string that you want to edit on runtime, other than that, it's pretty useless. With that being said, I don't see any harm in trying to set the text to a part if the widget's code doesn't see anything specific matching the part name, but that should be implemented per widget. -- Tom. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
