Carsten Haitzler ras...@rasterman.com wrote:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 04:19:37 +1000 David Seikel onef...@gmail.com
said:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 02:52:14 +0900 (KST) ChunEon Park
her...@naver.com
wrote:
There is no way to add resize callback to the object item at this
moment.
And sure, this
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-03 (화) 10:20:51
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
Totally agree with Mike and Tom.
I have even asked for this more than once
On 03/09/13 12:44, ChunEon Park wrote:
Normally. we dont' have discussion for just adding simple API.
So I didin't.
I knew that If it had the problem, then somebody would argue the objection.
As Antognolli said, it had been discussed and rejected.
--
Tom.
/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On 03/09/13 12:44, ChunEon Park wrote:
Normally. we dont' have discussion for just adding simple API.
So I didin't.
I knew that If it had the problem, then somebody would argue the objection.
As Antognolli
On 03/09/13 13:01, ChunEon Park wrote:
And i raised again.
When? By committing and hoping it would go unnoticed until Mike saw the
commit and commented on it?
--
Tom.
--
Learn the latest--Visual Studio 2012,
just it.
-Regards, Hermet-
-Original Message-
From: Tom Hacohentom.haco...@samsung.com
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-03 (화) 21:08:10
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary
:
Sent: 2013-09-03 (화) 21:08:10
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On 03/09/13 13:01, ChunEon Park wrote:
And i raised again.
When? By committing and hoping it would go unnoticed until Mike
-09-03 (화) 21:08:10
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On 03/09/13 13:01, ChunEon Park wrote:
And i raised again.
When? By committing and hoping it would go unnoticed until Mike saw the
commit
-
-Original Message-
From: Tom Hacohentom.haco...@samsung.com
To: Enlightenment developer
listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-03 (화) 21:08:10
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 16:46:17 -0300
Lucas De Marchi lucas.demar...@profusion.mobi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Michael Blumenkrantz
michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:35:48 -0300
Iván Briano sachi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:12 AM,
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Michael Blumenkrantz
michael.blumenkra...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 13:35:48 -0300
Iván Briano sachi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:12 AM, ChunEon Park her...@naver.com wrote:
just it.
That's not how you raise a discussion, you did
-
From: Tom Hacohentom.haco...@samsung.com
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-03 (화) 21:08:10
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On 03/09/13 13:01
Brianosachi...@gmail.com
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-04 (수) 01:35:48
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On Tue, Sep 3, 2013 at 9:12 AM, ChunEon Park
.
-Original Message-
From: Iván Brianosachieru@gmail.com
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-04 (수) 01:35:48
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
On Tue, Sep
so wait a minute...everyone fights against this for literally over a year,
and now it gets in without further discussion because applications require
it seriously?
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:25 AM, ChunEon Park - Enlightenment Git
no-re...@enlightenment.org wrote:
hermet pushed a commit to
To: Enlightenment developer listenlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-02 (월) 17:29:41
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
so wait a minute...everyone fights against this for literally over a year
] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
so wait a minute...everyone fights against this for literally over a year,
and now it gets in without further discussion because applications require
it seriously?
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013
: 2013-09-02 (월) 17:29:41
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
so wait a minute...everyone fights against this for literally over a year,
and now it gets in without further discussion because applications require
@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-02 (월) 18:20:35
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
I have to side with Mike here. Both the decision process and the
solution smell badly. Worse than Mike's tuna breakfasts
On 02/09/13 12:01, daniel.za...@samsung.com wrote:
Sorry for the dumb question but resize callback can't help on that?
Imo, storing pointers to obsolete objects can be very dangerous. But it
is just my opinion ;-)
It's not just your opinion, it's objectively dangerous.
Vive Valgrind! Vive la
I think it's too late to get rid of bad API considering the state of elm at
1.0
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Tom Hacohen tom.haco...@samsung.com wrote:
On 02/09/13 12:01, daniel.za...@samsung.com wrote:
Sorry for the dumb question but resize callback can't help on that?
Imo, storing
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Tom Hacohen tom.haco...@samsung.com wrote:
On 02/09/13 13:16, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote:
I think it's too late to get rid of bad API considering the state of elm at
1.0
Obviously. I was thinking about 2.0.
I have a few widgets on my kill-list.
Yeah, me
On 02/09/13 14:52, Iván Briano wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Tom Hacohen tom.haco...@samsung.com wrote:
On 02/09/13 13:16, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote:
I think it's too late to get rid of bad API considering the state of elm at
1.0
Obviously. I was thinking about 2.0.
I have a few
On Mon, 02 Sep 2013 14:56:31 +0100
Tom Hacohen tom.haco...@samsung.com wrote:
On 02/09/13 14:52, Iván Briano wrote:
On Mon, Sep 2, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Tom Hacohen tom.haco...@samsung.com wrote:
On 02/09/13 13:16, Michael Blumenkrantz wrote:
I think it's too late to get rid of bad API
;
Cc: ChunEon Parkher...@naver.com;
Sent: 2013-09-02 (월) 20:01:07
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01: elementary/widget
- introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
Sorry for the dumb question but resize callback can't help on that?
Imo, storing pointers to obsolete objects
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 02:52:14 +0900 (KST) ChunEon Park her...@naver.com
wrote:
There is no way to add resize callback to the object item at this
moment.
And sure, this api can be dangerous if app uses it incorrectly.
C can be dangerous if app uses it incorrectly. It's well known for it
in
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 04:19:37 +1000 David Seikel onef...@gmail.com said:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 02:52:14 +0900 (KST) ChunEon Park her...@naver.com
wrote:
There is no way to add resize callback to the object item at this
moment.
And sure, this api can be dangerous if app uses it
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 08:24:59 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
ras...@rasterman.com wrote:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 04:19:37 +1000 David Seikel onef...@gmail.com
said:
On Tue, 3 Sep 2013 02:52:14 +0900 (KST) ChunEon Park
her...@naver.com wrote:
There is no way to add resize callback
@lists.sourceforge.net;
Cc:
Sent: 2013-09-02 (월) 17:29:41
Subject: Re: [E-devel] [EGIT] [core/elementary] master 01/01:
elementary/widget - introduce elm_object_item_object_get().
so wait a minute...everyone fights against this for literally over a year,
and now it gets in without further discussion because
29 matches
Mail list logo
