Re: proposal: slight extension of gtkrc syntax for per-app settings

[Vlad Harchev <hvv hippo ru>]

On Sun, 15 Apr 2001, Vlad Harchev wrote:

 Hi, 

 Nobody replied to original letter.
 Does anybody have anything to say about this? Why shouldn't gtk apps be as
easy customizable as apps using Xt-based widgetsets?

 Will the patch be accepted that will implement proposed features?

 Best regards,
  -Vlad

> 
>  Hi, 
> 
>  Currently it's impossible to bind style specific to only particular program
> in a single gtkrc file (yes, gnomelibs add much more gtkrc files to the list
> of gtkrc files to parse, including files that contain a name of the program 
> in their names - but I'm talking about pure gtk).
> 
>  What I propose is to slightly extend syntax of 'pattern' in gtkrc files to
> allow using program name as a pattern component - e.g. the pattern
> syntax could look like the following:
> 	[:<program-name>:]<usual-pattern-syntax>
>  E.g., to override theme of gfoo widgets, one can write
>  	class ":gfoo:GtkWidget" style "gfoo-default"
>  This of course fill prohibbit the use of widget names that start and end with
> colon - but it adds a lot of flexibility!
> 
>  Also I would like to propose adding more items to the list of gtkrc files to
> parse at startup of each gtk program - so that a list of files contained a
> files that include the program name in them. For example, ordinary gnome app
> gfontsel has the following in their list of default gtkrc files:
> 
> /usr/etc/gtk/gtkrc
> ~/.gtkrc
> /usr/share/gtkrc
> /usr/share/gfontselrc
> ~/.gnome/gtkrc
> ~/.gnome/gfontselrc
> 
>  That's rather flexible. I think such flexibility (automatically parsing gtkrc
> files with names based on the program's name) would be very useful for gtk
> programs too.The only problem is deciding in which subdirectory of "~" to look
> for those additional gtkrc files.
> 
>  Since gtk2 has ability to set values of object properties from gtkrc files
> too, I think the need for such flexibility is increasing.  I think both
> proposed extensions (extended syntax and additional default styles) are rather
> ortogonal and both would be very useful to have. Granted, it's trivial to
> implement both of them. 
> 
>  What do you think about all this?
> 
>  Best regards,
>   -Vlad
> 
>