[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: Qt4 Themes
From:       Thomas =?iso-8859-1?q?L=FCbking?= <thomas.luebking () web ! de>
Date:       2006-07-03 23:10:16
Message-ID: 200607040110.17121.thomas.luebking () web ! de
[Download RAW message or body]

Am Montag, 3. Juli 2006 19:18 schrieb Sandro Giessl:
> > however the other way is much more flexible and allows to bring up new
> > elements even aside the KStyle base development (guess you wrote a widget
> > for an app, release that on kde-apps and define an element (beyond a kde
> > common base offset))
>
> And if several apps do that and enums get mixed up? We would need a central
> register of custom base offsets for applications... sounds way too
> complicated to me.
i doubt this would be extensively used. probably huge projects that tend to 
break the UI like amarok would make use of it.
and yes, there's be demand for a central list - but that could be outside 
kdelibs (just a long register on kde.org where a php script passes you a free 
value)
also this way we maybe could drop kstyle at all (or just keep a convenience 
wrapper)
> I would be glad enough if only widgets residing in kdelibs would be well
> supported by KStyle.
yes.

> method with the bool return type. Not sure how their attitude towards
> bloating their API this way is, but I informed a troll about this thread.
they'd rather have to break binary compatibility on the gui dll for windows 
(upshifting the return type is not a problem with a sane linker, afaics)
- so they're not gonna, i allready asked - hopefully they don't think we're 
trying to spam them :\

Thomas
-- 
Fear... Fear attracts the fearfull.
The strong. The weak. The innocent. The corrupt.
Fear... Fear is my ally!
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]