On approximately 12/2/2003 1:00 PM, came the following characters from
the keyboard of Laurent ROCHER:
5.
If -style need to be deprecated, i don't think it's a good idea to
a add -forcestyle.
We keep -style without deprecated warning message.
Or, we remove it and force people to use registered class for fix
a default style.
For me, -style don't need to be deprecated.
It's a programmer choice (and supposed know what he's doing ;o).
-popstyle/-pushstyle for set/reset a specific control style.
-style are usefull for set a fixed style.
There is also -addstyle and -remstyle, so really -style isn't that
necessary.
Laurent.
----- Original Message -----
Hello.
I'm going to look into this list of bugs to see what I can fix, but
I'm quite sure none of them are to do with my patches :) and maybe
you have some answers:
1. Default DialogBox background is white on Windows 2000, rather
than the correct colour for a buttonface/3dface. I assume this is
known because it's blatantly obvious.
2. NEM event onResize seems to be called in the constructor for
Windows and possibly all other widgets. This is very frustrating
because if you use onResize to handle your scaling, then often it
tries to scale widgets that have not yet been defined, causing an
error.
3. Timers no longer seem to work as documented. In fact they don't
work at all (for me). This could be something that only manifests
itself when the NEM is used, but I haven't tested that.
4. NEM events seem to be triggered tons of times. For example when I
click a mouse button I get about 60 onMouseDown calls.
5. There are times when -style is appropriate. I admit that -style
SHOULD be deprecated, but there should be a new argument such as
-forcestyle for when you know what you're doing. I can see that
default styles could be changed in future, and hardcoding -popstyle
for each default style seems rather crude to me.
Steve
--
Glenn -- http://nevcal.com/
===========================
Like almost everyone, I receive a lot of spam every day, much of it
offering to help me get out of debt or get rich quick. It's ridiculous.
-- Bill Gates
And here is why it is ridiculous:
The division that includes Windows posted an operating profit of $2.26
billion on revenue of $2.81 billion.
--from Reuters via
http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/031113/tech_microsoft_msn_1.html
So that's profit of over 400% of investment... with a bit more
investment in Windows technology, particularly in the area of
reliability, the profit percentage might go down, but so might the bugs
and security problems? Seems like it would be a reasonable tradeoff.
WalMart earnings are 3.4% of investment.
