> > On 07.06.2011, at 19:05, anon wrote: > > >=20 > > In other words: I stick to handle() for dear life :D. Thanks for the = > explanation Stan. > > It's not that simple. The handle() method manages incoming events, but = > not every event will call your callback. For example, buttons call a = > callback when the mouse was clicked *and* released inside the bounding = > box. So using an Fl_PUSH event as an indicator that the button was = > pressed is wrong.
I know that far. There are other button styles (the repeat button for = > example) where an FL_PUSH leads to one or even many callbacks when the = > mouse button stays pushed. > > handle() is for raw events > > callbacks are for the vanilla user interactons= > Well I still stick to handle() as my widget needs won't be causing troubles...yet.. But here's the question (another ?! oh lawd !!!), couldn't these type of widgets re-invoke handle() with those vanilla events ? or couldn't there be two handle() methods ?: handle_raw() and handle_vanilla() ? whichever case, it sure would be less messy. Thanks for the reply Mathias! looking forward for any opinions. _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
