On Wed, 9 Jun 2010 18:48:51 +0200 Jiří Techet <tec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > BTW, why do you destroy the dialog instead of hiding it? > >> > >> It's just that I can write > >> > >> if (switch_dialog) > >> > >> instead of > >> > >> if (switch_dialog && GTK_WIDGET_VISIBLE(switch_dialog)) > >> > >> but I can change that if your preference is different. > > > > When I wrote the code I assumed it would be faster to keep the dialog > > than reconstruct it each time, but I didn't do any benchmarking. > > Optimizations like this would make sense only if you were trying to > open the window 1000-times per second, otherwise the performance > difference is absolutely unimportant. I suppose so in this case. For the Open dialog it may be important as that can be slow to populate. > > > > > Another general issue is that doing more than one change in a > > 'patch' makes it harder to review. > > I wanted to make the code a bit more readable, that's why there are > more changes. For instance I renamed > > switch_dialog_cancelled > > to > > switch_in_progress > > (and inverted the boolean value) because the name was a bit confusing > (switch_dialog_cancelled is set to FALSE [read "uncancelled", which is > a bit ugly] 600ms before the switch dialog actually appears). If you > wish, I can try to split it into more patches, I'm just afraid I > introduce some extra bugs on the way. OK, don't bother. > > I've also noticed that I mix spaces and tabs for indents - I'll fix that. Regards, Nick _______________________________________________ Geany-devel mailing list Geany-devel@uvena.de http://lists.uvena.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geany-devel