But what happens if the new itemCount is less than the old. Do we get rid of
the ones on the end. Is setting it to zero really a special case, or is the
special case that new < old????
On 21-Nov-00 at 16:27, Andrei Rezvov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Here comes the problem report for a problem that appeares in the current
> Lesstif XmList implementation.
>
> Lesstif version: current (both 1.2 and 2.x branches)
> ------------------
>
> Problem description:
> ------------------------
>
> Have a look at the simple user code:
> =============================================
> static void clear_order()
> {
> Arg arglist[5];
> int ac = 0;
>
> XtSetArg(arglist[ac], XmNitemCount, 0);
> ac++;
> /*
> ! XtSetArg(arglist[ac], XmNitems, NULL);
> ! ac++;
> */
> XtSetArg(arglist[ac], XmNselectedItemCount, 0);
> ac++;
> XtSetValues(widget_array[k_total_order], arglist, ac);
> }
> =============================================
>
> It produces the following warning message:
> =============================================
> Warning:
> Name: total_order
> Class: XmList
> XmNitemCount and XmNitems must be set by the same XtSetValues.
> =============================================
> The XmList item list is not cleared, which is wrong.
>
> Proper behaviour:
> ---------------------
> If XmNitemCount is set to zero, the item list must be *silently*
> cleared.
>
> Problem resolution:
> ----------------------
> Change the condition:
>
> lib/Xm/List.c: 3438
> if (List_ItemCount(old) != List_ItemCount(new_w) &&
> List_Items(old) == List_Items(new_w))
> {
>
> to handle properly this case and add code that cleans up the item list
> when the item count is being set to zero.
>
> Verify, please, all other coupled attributes as well.
>
> Regards,
> Andrei
>
>
>
>
