On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 08:48:33AM +0800, Leon Brooks wrote:
> On Sunday 19 June 2005 01:46, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I need to compile the list of things that bother me about the
> > GTK+ file chooser and submit it to bugzilla someday. I know I'm
> > not the only one being bothered with it's design.
> Agree. But I'm not sure that changing the existing GTK dialog as such
> would be as useful as offering user-configurable alternatives, which is
> why I spoke of a "zero overhead" shim.
> Using such and compiling GIMP would by default result in binaries
> identical to the current ones, but you could use it to (at compile
> time) invoke alternatives in some places, one of which could
> concievably be a (no longer quite zero overhead, you'd have to at least
> bounce each call through a table) run-time choice of default GTK,
> alternate GTK or Qt-through-wrapper.
You're basing your idea on an assumption that is wrong. GIMP doesn't
simply call a set of functions to display open and save dialogs. It
derives a new object type from GtkFileChooseDialog and implements extended
functionality that way.
So a wrapper for the Qt dialog would have to implement a full GObject
type, and wrap most of GtkWidget's functionality, which is not a small
task. It's certainly possible, but it'd be a maintainence nightmare.
Gimp-developer mailing list