On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 16:53:38 +0000 "Eoff, Ullysses A" <ullysses.a.e...@intel.com> wrote:
> The ELM docs don't explain the concept... nor does a Google search AFAICT. > So what is it? > > Currently, setting a window as withdrawn appears to just hide it (i.e. > elm_win_withdrawn_set(..., EINA_TRUE))... so what's the point, why not use > evas_object_hide(...) instead? > > Next, if we call evas_object_show(...) on a withdrawn window, should it be > unwithdrawn too? This is how it works right now on X11 engine, but is that > correct? Or should you be required to call elm_win_withdrawn_set(..., > EINA_FALSE)? > > Essentially, I'm asking because I want to make sure it's consistent (which > it's not) and correct across engines (e.g. X11 vs. Wayland), or should it be? > As Tom basically stated on IRC, this probably shouldn't even be logic that > is specific to any engine, rather it's a general thing. > > Finally, the clear definition of a withdrawn window should be added to the > docs. > > ---- > U. Artie > > withdrawn is the same as iconify, except that the application may decide to free/destroy/reduce functionality in order to conserve system resources. it's like how android apps never close but also aren't in the foreground or using noticeable cpu/battery. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
