Am Freitag, den 30.09.2005, 16:10 +0200 schrieb Alexander Larsson: > On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 11:27 +0200, Christian Neumair wrote: > > While we treat the margins of the icon container in canvas units, we set > > them in pixel units. Use a big panel and you'll note that it overlaps > > the icons on the top, as reported by bug 149847 [1]. > > > > Proposed patch attached. > > Thats not right. Some places treat the margins as canvas units already I wasn't aware of these horrible inconsistencies, sorry. > Furthermore, the margins should be in pixels, since they are in pixels. > When the zoom changes the margin in pixels doesn't change, but the > margin in canvas units does. Oh, that's what these obscure canvas units are all about :D. I didn't closely investigate it and thought this would just be some obscure factor like the PANGO 1024 #define. > A better fix would be to always correctly treat ->*_margin as in pixel > coordinates. Surprisingly, that doesn't fix it. The icons are now layed out extremely tight to the canvas top-left edge. The whole icon container code is quiet confusing, and a mixture of #defines and externally set margins. The layout code for instance does not do x+=left_margin and y+=top_margin before laying out, resulting in a top-left layout with double right/bottom margins. Also, lay_down_icons_tblr is extremely tied to the desktop, which is reflected by DESKTOP_PAD_HORIZONTAL and DESKTOP_PAD_VERTICAL defines it contains. The bitrotten icon container really deserves an in-depth investigation. -- Christian Neumair <chris gnome-de org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part