Re: [gtk-list] Gnome/GtkCanvas (was Re: gtk_args_collect & gnome--)
- From: Brett Viren <bviren ale physics sunysb edu>
- To: gtk-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: [gtk-list] Gnome/GtkCanvas (was Re: gtk_args_collect & gnome--)
- Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 19:28:52 -0400 (EDT)
Owen Taylor writes:
>
> Federico Mena Quintero <federico@nuclecu.unam.mx> writes:
>
> > > Actually, Federico, what about renaming the GnomeCanvas to GtkCanvas,
> > > putting it into the Gtk+ distro, making gtk_object_new/set fit to
> > > stand in for gnome_canvas_item_new/set and then do away with the
> > > latter?
> >
> > I don't have an opinion regarding moving the GnomeCanvas to Gtk.
> > However, note that it requires Gdk_Imlib, which Gtk doesn't.
>
> GnomeCanvas should be moved to GTK+ because it is an extremely
> neat and useful widget that can be useful in any GTK+ program
> and doesn't have any relation to a desktop environment.
>
> The image item type (as I understand it the only one that
> depends on gdk_imlib) can be left in GNOME for now. Perhaps
> in the future GTK+ will come with something like gdk_imlib -
> at that point it can be moved into GTK+ as well.
I am all for moving GnomeCavas to to GtkCanvas (that is, if I get a
vote <grin>), but I think it may be a bad idea to break it up with
part in Gnome and part in Gtk+. Especially since it seems (to me)
that for most uses the image item type is the most important (most
used) one in GnomeCanvas.
As for the problem of gdk_imlib dependency: How about merging
gdk_imlib into gdk *BUT* include a ``--with-gdk-imlib'' flag in the
config (which would be on be default)? Then if someone doesn't want
the added code size of gdk_imlib (and all widgets which depend on it,
like GtkCanvas would) they don't have to have it.
I am no expert with GTK+'s documentation, err, source code, so I don't
know if this compile time switch would be feasible or not, but it
seems that it should work.
-Brett.
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]