Re: Treeview column width changed signal

[Jeffrey Barish <jeff_barish earthlink net>]

Gorshkov wrote:

> Lack of patience, and the feeling that I was talking to a brick wall, to
> be perfectly honest. I even posted all the code he  needed to  implement
> the solution - and given that it was only about 20 or 30 lines total, I
> wouldn't exactly call it overly complicated. The only code I did not
> give him was the code to actually save the data to a file - everything
> else - the signal handlers, callbacks, etc, is there.

I had already implemented the solution you gave me before I resurrected the
old thread.  It works for restoring the column widths after exiting and
restarting the program.  My lengthy comments were not criticism of your
suggestion but an attempt to explain why its application does not meet all
of my needs in a straightforward manner.  The remaining problem is that a
remote section of code needs to know the column widths while the program is
running.  It would have been trivial to obtain the information from the
file, but the file does not get updated when the column widths change, only
when the treeview is destroyed.  The solution which you, Dave Howorth, and
even I have suggested in this thread is to read the column widths from the
treeview.  Usually, implementing that solution is also trivial.  It is not
trivial in my situation because the remote section of code does not know
about the treeview.  Nevertheless, the solution is practicable.  Note that
in my original posting I did not ask for a solution, I asked why GTK has
this small limitation.  I understand that there is a way to implement a
solution, but I long for the solution that would have been trivial.  The
implication that writing the file when the treeview is destroyed is
equivalent to writing it when the column widths change is wrong.  Although
there are cases where the two approaches are equivalent, they are not
equivalent in situations that Scott and I have encountered.  Moreover, the
designers of Qt and wxWidgets evidently don't consider the two approaches
to be equivalent because they chose to support both.  My objective in
posting my message was simply to encourage the designers of GTK also to
support both.  With that resolution, you would be free to continue to use
the destroy signal and I would be free to use the column-width-changed
signal, even if we were both doing so out of stubborn adherence to the
familiar.
-- 
Jeffrey Barish