Re: gnome-wrapper

[Nat Friedman <nat helixcode com>]

Dietmar Maurer writes:
 > Nat Friedman wrote:
 > 
 > > Dietmar Maurer writes:
 > >  >
 > >  > What if I donīt want a cover window at all? What are the disadvantages if we
 > >  > simply return the socket window?
 > >
 > >     If you don't want a cover window at all, you don't have to have
 > > one.  Just don't use the gnome_client_site_new_view() function (which
 > > is provided as a convenience to cover the common case where you do
 > > want a cover).
 > 
 > With the above workaround you need direct access to the GnomeClientSite structure,
 > which is not a nice solution. Why not return the socket and make the wrapper
 > optional. Or write a support function which creates the wrapper. I can't see any
 > disadvantage.

    That's just a bug in the ClientSite API then.  We should add a
function gnome_client_site_add_view_frame() so that you don't need
direct access to the structure.  The wrapper *is* optional.

    If you really feel strongly about it, you can add
gnome_client_site_new_view_I_hate_wrappers_for_some_unknown_reason.

    What I don't get is why you don't want the wrapper in the first
place.  Just make it an always-uncovered invisible wrapper and you'll
never notice it.

Nat