Hi!,
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:03 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> I certainly have not sat down and exhaustively tried to figure this out.
Oh, nice list below, I was somehow thinking a shorter in scope, less
tangential, set of changes.
>
> There is a fair bit of cruft in the core; if you were
On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:19:08 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 20:09 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> > floats. in Clutter, for instance, most of the operations are done using
> > fixed point algebra and transforming doubles in the public API into
> > 16.16 or 21.11 fixed point num
Behdad Esfahbod skrev:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 16:15 -0400, Martyn Russell wrote:
Hi,
>> Jeff volunteered to help set up gtk.org with moinmoin [2] and
>> mentioned that http://www.pango.org/ and http://www.gnome-db.org/ currently
>> use
>> that particular Wiki. My personal view of it, is that it
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 19:19 -0400, Damon Chaplin wrote:
>
> But the cairo API already uses doubles, for coordinates and
> transformations. So if the canvas used fixed point numbers you'd be
> converting to doubles and then back again. With 32-bit fixed point
> numbers you also cut down the maximum
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:20 -0400, Owen Taylor wrote:
> I want to point out here that while you can specify units in points or
> ems, or whatever, with a data type of fixed point numbers,
> or doubles, or whatever, you simply can't ignore the pixel grid and
> expect to get good looking results; i
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 20:09 +0100, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Sun, 2007-04-22 at 21:16 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
>
> > In these days of 64-bit machines I don't think sizeof (double) is a big
> > deal, if its just for a few coordinates per item. Anyway if we're using
> > interfaces for items the
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:01 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
>>> [snip]
What do we do?
>>> [snip]
>>>
>>> We wait until someone has an actual need
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 16:15 -0400, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
> Jeff volunteered to help set up gtk.org with moinmoin [2] and
> mentioned
> that http://www.pango.org/ and http://www.gnome-db.org/ currently use
> that particular Wiki. My personal view of it, is that it seems
> somewhat
> simplistic an
Martyn Russell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently commented on the mailing list [1] about improving the GTK+
> web site so that .html files don't include formatting. The idea was to
> make it easier for developers and anyone else contributing patches to
> focus on content and not have to worry about styl
> > > I think you mean "below" the gobject stack, don't you? The data
> > > structure libraries are required by gobject after all, aren't they?
> > >
> >
> > Heh, yeah maybe my idea of gobject'ized glib data structs is a little
> > futile :) not sure just exactly what I'd do with a derivable GLi
El lun, 23-04-2007 a las 13:44 -0400, Havoc Pennington escribió:
> For most Flash usage, API really is not the issue... people do it like
> HTML, where they write the markup then add a little bit of scripting
> (for Flash, it isn't literally markup, but what I mean is 'data not
> code'). Unlike
El lun, 23-04-2007 a las 18:50 +0200, Carlos Garnacho escribió:
> On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 10:30 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> > canvas = new Canvas ();
> > svg = canvas.load_svg ("foo.svg");
> > handle = svg.get_object_by_id ("bouncing-ball");
> > handle.animate (new BounceAnimation
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:01 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> What do we do?
> > [snip]
> >
> > We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> > problem.
>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:01 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> What do we do?
> > [snip]
> >
> > We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> > problem.
>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 14:01 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> What do we do?
> > [snip]
> >
> > We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> > problem.
>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 15:01 -0400, Brandon Casey wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> > [snip]
> >> What do we do?
> > [snip]
> >
> > We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> > problem.
>
On Sun, 2007-04-22 at 21:16 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> In these days of 64-bit machines I don't think sizeof (double) is a big
> deal, if its just for a few coordinates per item. Anyway if we're using
> interfaces for items then the items can use whatever they like
> internally.
it's not a mat
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Murray Cumming wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> [snip]
>> What do we do?
> [snip]
>
> We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
> problem.
Uh, I don't get it. Do you imply the problem and need I described are
no
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:46 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
[snip]
> What do we do?
[snip]
We wait until someone has an actual need for such a change, or an actual
problem.
--
Murray Cumming
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.murrayc.com
www.openismus.com
___
gtk-deve
>For the record, I dont think glib is oversized or bloated at
>all, I dont think its size is even a concern worth considering
>even in embedded world, that being said...
FYI
Here is part of an "ls -la" off an ARM embedded device. (ARM being the
x86 of embedded devices)
190260 Mar 14 2007 l
Hi,
Carlos Garnacho wrote:
> What are we missing in the current core? What benefits would bring a new
> one?
I certainly have not sat down and exhaustively tried to figure this out.
There is a fair bit of cruft in the core; if you were starting over, I'm
sure you'd want to just kill GdkWindow f
Hi,
Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> Now for the other use-case... in GNOME we don't have much experience
> with loading SVG-like things and then manipulating them (think Flash).
> Maybe we can find someone with Flash experience to comment on what API
> would be helpful to them?
For most Flash usa
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wonder if gtk.org is still hosted at Berkeley as mentioned here:
> http://gtk.org/about.html. I also wonder if we I should get rid of the
> 2nd paragraph or write it in past tense. How about the third
> paragraph?
- Shawn T. Amundson is
>
>e.g. the SVG spec says high quality viewers should use doubles for
>calculations:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/types.html#BasicDataTypes
The problem with double is not the size it is the speed of them. Right
now there are people like (me) who are trying to use GTK on cell phones.
Working with
Hi,
I wonder if gtk.org is still hosted at Berkeley as mentioned here:
http://gtk.org/about.html. I also wonder if we I should get rid of the
2nd paragraph or write it in past tense. How about the third
paragraph?
--
my place on the web:
floss-and-misc.blogspot.com
__
Hello!,
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 17:11 +0200, Sven Herzberg wrote:
> Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > There is something which bothers me though. Support for some units,
> > points for example, would require floating points measures. And I
> > suspect we don't want to do layout in floating point (inst
Hi Federico :),
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 10:30 -0500, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> El jue, 19-04-2007 a las 15:00 -0400, Havoc Pennington escribió:
>
> > I'd step back first and do use-cases instead, and also talk about at a
> > high level what the canvas is for and when it would be used, i.e.:
Hi Havoc!,
On Fri, 2007-04-20 at 10:13 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> In HippoCanvas we took this to the extreme of not including gdk.h or
> gtk.h in the canvas core. I happen to really like this approach, but
> in
> general I tend to like to keep code almost annoyingly
> layered/orthogonal,
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Michael L Torrie wrote:
>> On the other hand I don't often use gobjects, the event loop,
>> call-backs, or any other part of glib in many of these little utility
>> programs.
>>
>
> The real question of course is whether everyone's "use" and "don't us
El dom, 22-04-2007 a las 22:26 +0100, Damon Chaplin escribió:
> So basically it is all kinds of data visualization and manipulation, and
> the occasional animation. Plus some WYSIWYG stuff to be printed.
For the record, I fully trust Damon to do the right thing for the
programmatic side of the ca
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:02 -0400, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
> > What about refreshing gtk logo in the process ?
>
> I was thinking this too.
>
> > I gave it a shot but I'm sure many talented people could give a
> better
> > proposition.
>
> Actually, I quite like it - what do others think?
Add
On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am thinking of doing this in 2 stages:
>
> 1. Remove all the unnecessary files and have a general clean up and
> reorganise.
> 2. Restyle the site.
I can't wait for those updates. I also don't have too much time but
please state if you want
On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christophe Dehais wrote:
> > On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >> Questions:
> >> ==
> >> • Does anyone else have any further suggestions at this stage?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > What about refreshing gtk logo in the
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> Brandon Casey wrote:
>> And this has caused the dependency
>> requirements of glib to grow, which makes it harder to build (think non
>> linux platforms).
>
> OTOH, having all the portability goo in GLib makes all the *apps* easier to
> build once yo
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:28 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:17 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
> > On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > > It might be advantagous if alot of the glib data structures
> > > were moved somewhere above libgobject in
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Ross Burton wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:17 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
>> I think you mean "below" the gobject stack, don't you? The data
>> structure libraries are required by gobject after all, aren't they?
>>
>> In any case, I think a future split out of the glib d
Brandon Casey wrote:
> And this has caused the dependency
> requirements of glib to grow, which makes it harder to build (think non
> linux platforms).
OTOH, having all the portability goo in GLib makes all the *apps* easier
to build once you get GLib done. Most of the stuff in GLib _is_ needed
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Emmanuele Bassi wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
>> On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 12:33 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
>>>
>>> I am posting to suggest that glib has crossed a threshold
>>> of size and functionality and that users would benefit from
>>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:17 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
> I think you mean "below" the gobject stack, don't you? The data
> structure libraries are required by gobject after all, aren't they?
>
> In any case, I think a future split out of the glib data structure api
> would be excellent. I pr
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 09:17 -0600, Michael L Torrie wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> > It might be advantagous if alot of the glib data structures
> > were moved somewhere above libgobject in the stack (glibutils ?),
> > this way they could have the option of
Michael L Torrie wrote:
> On the other hand I don't often use gobjects, the event loop,
> call-backs, or any other part of glib in many of these little utility
> programs.
>
The real question of course is whether everyone's "use" and "don't use"
lists are similar or not.
It's a little bit aca
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> It might be advantagous if alot of the glib data structures
> were moved somewhere above libgobject in the stack (glibutils ?),
> this way they could have the option of being gobject based,
> opening a whole new world of possible code p
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
> My idea would be to make backbuffer-handling more flexible:
> - If several x-windows are repainted do not acquire a backbuffer for
> every sub-window, instead acquire one (for the largest repainted are)
> and share it.
this is already the case, furth
On Sat, 2007-04-21 at 22:12 +0300, Kalle Vahlman wrote:
> 2007/4/21, Gustavo J. A. M. Carneiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > I can tell you the reasons why I usually use a canvas:
> >
> > 1. Writing widgets is _very hard_ (when compared to e.g. canvas
> > items).
>
> Depends on your language
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 10:05 -0400, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 12:33 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
> >
> > I am posting to suggest that glib has crossed a threshold
> > of size and functionality and that users would benefit from
> > a splitting of the library into two or more s
On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 12:33 -0500, Brandon Casey wrote:
>
> I am posting to suggest that glib has crossed a threshold
> of size and functionality and that users would benefit from
> a splitting of the library into two or more separate libraries.
For the record, I dont think glib is oversized or b
Christophe Dehais wrote:
> On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Questions:
>> ==
>> • Does anyone else have any further suggestions at this stage?
>>
>>
>
> What about refreshing gtk logo in the process ?
I was thinking this too.
> I gave it a shot but I'm sure man
On 4/23/07, Martyn Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Questions:
==
• Does anyone else have any further suggestions at this stage?
What about refreshing gtk logo in the process ?
I gave it a shot but I'm sure many talented people could give a better
proposition.
Christophe
gtk-lo
hey Martyn,
what you say overall sounds good to me, so please get started on your ideas.
i'll just comment on the sections where i see/find a slightly different angle.
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Martyn Russell wrote:
ÿÿ Can we remove these unused or unlinked (no href) top level .html
files?
ÿÿ s
On Sun, 2007-04-22 at 21:16 +0100, Damon Chaplin wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-04-19 at 16:19 -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
> > Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
> > > There is something which bothers me though. Support for some units,
> > > points for example, would require floating points measures. And I
>
Owen Taylor wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 12:52 +0200, Tim Janik wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
>> i'd guess so, unless someone actually objects...
>> have you used google to search for any external references to these
>> links that indicate they could be worth keeping?
>>
Tim Janik wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Martyn Russell wrote:
>
>> I spent some time looking into the structure of the gtk-web SVN module
>> to familiarise myself and formulate some questions, so before I continue:
>
> rock, thanks for signiing up for the task at http://live.gnome.org/GtkTasks
>
On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 12:52 +0200, Tim Janik wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Martyn Russell wrote:
> i'd guess so, unless someone actually objects...
> have you used google to search for any external references to these
> links that indicate they could be worth keeping?
> e.g. see:
>http://www.g
On Mon, 23 Apr 2007, Martyn Russell wrote:
Hi,
I recently commented on the mailing list [1] about improving the GTK+
web site so that .html files don't include formatting. The idea was to
make it easier for developers and anyone else contributing patches to
focus on content and not have to worr
Hi,
I recently commented on the mailing list [1] about improving the GTK+
web site so that .html files don't include formatting. The idea was to
make it easier for developers and anyone else contributing patches to
focus on content and not have to worry about style. For a while now, I
have thought
55 matches
Mail list logo
