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

List:       kfm-devel
Subject:    Re: QIconView invert selection patch
From:       Richard Moore <rich () ipso-facto ! freeserve ! co ! uk>
Date:       1999-12-02 22:56:21
[Download RAW message or body]



Reginald Stadlbauer wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 02 Dec 1999, Richard Moore wrote:
> >Reginald Stadlbauer wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 02 Dec 1999, Richard Moore wrote:
> >> >Here's the implementation for the invert selection method I talked
> >> >about, do you think you could
> >> >add it to qiconview Reggie? Thanks
> >>
> >> For what is that needed? I mean adding it wouldn't be a problem, but I can't
> >> see a point where this method makes sense in a general way. And I have to be
> >> convinced before I add it (because I also need to add the same to QListView and
> >> QListBox then :-)
> >
> >Why? I think you should do it, but I don't see what forces you to.
> 
> Well, I want to keep the three classes as consistent as possible!

An excellent reason :-)

> 
> >> So, if you can convince me that this is needed, I'll add it. If it only makes
> >> sense for filemanagers, then it should be added to libkonq/konqiconviewwidget
> >> or how this is called IMO.
> >
> >I think it is a generally useful selction option. I would like to have
> >it in the
> >file dialog (when in multi select mode) too, for example. I often want
> >to be able
> >to say do XXX to every file/record etc. except for x, y and Z and
> >selecting them,
> >then inverting the selection is by far the easiest way I know to do
> >this. This is
> >true in many contexts other than dealing with files (consider a patch
> >manager as
> >a another example).
> >
> >The reason I put it in qiconview was that I thought it was generally
> >useful and
> >that it could be more efficient if it was in the iconview itself.
> >
> >Have I managed to convince you? If not I'll rewrite it for the
> >konqiconviewthingy.
> 
> Ok, ok. I'll put it in there (and into the other s classes) :-))

Thanks

Rich.

> 
> >> Also, your implementation has a small problem, it works not correct in
> >> Single selection mode! So a
> >>
> >> if ( d->mode == Single )
> >>         return;
> >>
> >> has to be added.
> >>
> >
> >I guess you should add this to the select all method too,
> 
> No, not needed there.
> 
> --
> Reggie

-- 
     Richard Moore		rich@ipso-facto.freeserve.co.uk
http://www.robocast.com/	richard@robocast.com
http://developer.kde.org/	rich@kde.org

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