Re: GTK 3 support status

[John Lindgren <john lindgren aol com>]

On 12/05/2011 02:22 AM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 4:18 PM, Tristan Van Berkom<tvb gnome org>  wrote:
> > Hi John,
> >    I am responsible for a large part of your pain.
> >
> > And I'm also surprised that this code is not working for you.
> >
> > The last time I looked at size negotiation, the toplevel window constraints
> > have always been based on the minimum-for-minimum request of the
> > window contents (minimum height for minimum width).
> >
> > However, some observations while running your test:
> >   o The minimum size constraint of your window is correct, it's set to about
> >      20 chars of width, this is the smallest size your window can be
> >      (firing up your test case allows me to shrink the window to that size)
> >   o A *bad* ugly bug here is that your label does not ellipsize, what is
> >      up with that ? How come your label wraps when it was not asked to wrap ?
> >   o If the label were configured to wrap, then it *must* require at least the
> >      minimum height for it's minimum width, however the broken label does
> >      not require that width... instead when shrinking the window it wraps
> >      out of view
> >   o Heightening the window will give some random extra allocation to
> >      the child label, showing the wrapped text...
> >
> > So, I can observe a behavioural change here, the toplevel window is
> > behaving actually quite nicely, it seems to be constraining the window
> > size to the minimum-for-minimum request, and then setting a default
> > size to the natural width/height request.
> >
> > So I'm attaching my version of your test case, actually except for
> > the label being somehow severely broken here, your code works
> > nicely... I added a line that says gtk_window_set_default_size()
> > and I think that will fix all your problems.
> >
> > Actually anyway I have an outdated branch of GTK+ here so I
> > suspect I'm just running into a *really bad* label bug which
> > probably never made it to any production release...
> >
> > In short, the behavioural change is that the default size of a
> > window is now also derived from the natural request of it's content,
> > you can easily override that by adding the 2 lines of code which
> > I added to your test case, no "waiting for realize" hacks involved.
> Clarification: in the code I sent here... I queried the minimum width
> of the label, ideally if you just want the window to show by default at
> it's minimum width, you should query the window itself, not one of
> it's children.

This works for resizable windows.  For fixed-size windows, however, the 
label still does not ellipsize.  I am attaching another test case.  
Uncomment line 8, and suddenly the label expands to its full, 
unellipsized width again.

-- John