Re: Preferences heads-up

[Jens Finke <jens triq net>]

Hi,

On 9 Jul 2002, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> I just removed the Edit/Preferences code, its dialog box, all the
> property control mechanism, and all the associated code which was
> horrible to begin with.

What do you mean? What exactly did you not like? I think it was much
better since I fixed it for Gnome2.

> So now we only have the View menu, which works nicely.  The code that
> handles it is horrible, too, but not as horrible as the Preferences code
> used to be.
>
> If anyone wants to hack on this, I'd like the GConf-handling code to use
> strings rather than integers for enumeration values.  E.g. right now we
> use (0, 1, 2) for (nearest, bilinear, hyperbolic).  We should be storing
> strings in the GConf database instead.

And then doing a string comparison each time? Hm, well we can do but why
is it so much better?

But the main point is: I really wonder why we go a separate way than any
other gnome app wrt preferences. EoG is the only program which changes
it's preferences directly in a menu. My plan for Gnome 2.2 was to drop the
menu-preferences instead of the preference dialog.

On a similar note: We should step back and take a look at the preferences
again. I have the feeling we make everything configurable we can, but
don't think about it if it's make sense. I propose these preferences
(which should then go into a dialog again):

 [ ] Use Interpolation  (this switches between bilinear and nearest
                         neighbour)

 [ ] Indicate transparency through check pattern

 [ ] Use color for transparency [Color Selector Button]


Of course the last ones are exclusive radio buttons. IMHO these make more
sense than adjusting the check pattern size ...

Regards,


   Jens

-- 
 -= http://triq.net/~pearl =-   -= jens triq net =-