[clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Havoc Pennington
Hi, Right now (with layout removed) Clutter only has one kind of size, which is (usually) equivalent to GTK's allocation. With layout re-added presumably there will also be a request (possibly made up of a minimum and natural size). I'm wondering if it would work nicely to add a third size/posit

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Gwenole Beauchesne
Hi, On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Havoc Pennington wrote: So you can use the scale factor much as a "transient allocation". However, there's no equivalent for setting position - there isn't a separate translate() from set_position() as there's a separate scale() from set_size(). Isn't this clutter_act

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Matthew Allum
Hi; I cant really comment as I really know little about deeper layout workings and how they should be. What I can say though is we tried to add layouts to clutter but when you throw in all the translations and 3D space and the kind of 'freeform' nature of Clutter we reached the conclusion it was

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Havoc Pennington
Hi, On Feb 13, 2008 11:19 AM, Matthew Allum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Therefor we decided to at least provide enough hooks in Clutter to make > it easy for layouts (and policy) to be implemented outside of Clutter > for a specific use case This is kind of what I'm wrestling with; if I think ab

[clutter] TidyActor alignment

2008-02-13 Thread Havoc Pennington
Minor Tidy API suggestion, I think the floating-point xalign/yalign are a weird historical thing from GTK - I have never seen a value other than 0.0, 0.5, or 1.0. And it turns out, there's another value you want that can't be expressed as floating point - FILL. So HippoCanvas does: /* How an ite

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Matthew Allum
On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 17:33 +, Tomas Frydrych wrote: > >> > > > > This sounds like a bug - will look into it. > > That is by design; Design by avoidance of particularly tricky stuff ;-) Im pretty sure old old versions of Clutter used to take scale transforms at least into account. > the

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Tomas Frydrych
Matthew Allum wrote: > Hi; > > I cant really comment as I really know little about deeper layout > workings and how they should be. What I can say though is we tried to > add layouts to clutter but when you throw in all the translations and 3D > space and the kind of 'freeform' nature of Clutter w

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Matthew Allum
On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 18:21 +, Tomas Frydrych wrote: > Matthew Allum wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 17:33 +, Tomas Frydrych wrote: > >>> This sounds like a bug - will look into it. > >> That is by design; > > As I understand it; > > > > - get_size() should return the 'true' bounding

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Tomas Frydrych
Matthew Allum wrote: > On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 17:33 +, Tomas Frydrych wrote: >>> This sounds like a bug - will look into it. >> That is by design; > As I understand it; > > - get_size() should return the 'true' bounding box of its children by > calling abs_size|get_vertices on each child.

Re: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Matthew Allum
Hi; (a prerequisite: Im really not an expert on layout or there implementation) On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 12:04 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > Hi, > > On Feb 13, 2008 11:19 AM, Matthew Allum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Therefor we decided to at least provide enough hooks in Clutter to make > >

RE: [clutter] transient allocations

2008-02-13 Thread Tapani.Palli
Hello; >-Original Message- >From: ext Tomas Frydrych [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 13 February, 2008 20:22 >To: clutter >Subject: Re: [clutter] transient allocations > >Matthew Allum wrote: >> On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 17:33 +, Tomas Frydrych wrote: This sounds like a bug - will