Subject: [E-devel] [E-Devel][Patch][Elementary]Genlist - Edje Item
Cache Refactoring
This is patch for reconstructing genlist's item cache.
Each item cache functions do harsh jobs so just push,pop by
Elm_Gen_Item * now.
Before, cache is disabled by comments. But I enabled item cache again
(even for the case which tree_effect_enabled is on).
I changed some functions:
_item_cache_find() --> _item_cache_pop()
_item_cache_add() --> _item_cache_push()
_item_cache_zero() -->_item_cache_all_free()
And I removed _item_cache_clean() function because I made
_item_cache_push() to don't exceed the item_cache_max. So clean-up of
cache is not needed anymore.
SVN revision: 77944
Subject: [E-devel] [patch][elementary] diskselector - bug fix
diskselector has two bugs.
1. on round enable mode
elm_diskselector_item_append(); does not call elm_box_pack_*() for
over_items and under_items which are added when the display item is
bigger
than 3.
because over_items and under_items is not added, the diskselector shows
just 4 items + half item(NOT 5 items), in case of display item number
is 5
- elm_diskselector_display_item_num(obj, 5); -.
this bug could be found only if u use as following sequence.
a. elm_diskselector_round_enabled_set(obj, EINA_TRUE);
b. elm_diskselector_item_append();
2. on the round disable mode + bigger than 3 display item
even though display item is bigger than 3 on the round disable
mode, only
two blank items are added - left_blank, right_blank.
because of this, the first item could not be selected. means.. the first
item cannot be located in the middle of diskselector.
if u scroll the diskselector to the left-most, then the second item is
selected as below.
[blank] [ 1st ] [ 2nd ] [ 3rd ] [ 4th ]
so if the display item is bigger than 3, more blank items would be
necessary.
include lines to resolve above 1st bug, the patch would resolve
this issue
also.
SVN revision: 77740
Subject: [E-devel] [patch][elementary] multibuttonentry - access feature
i have attached a patch which has access feature for the multibuttonentry.
it was hard time to implement access feature on the multibuttonentry than
others.
SVN revision: 77738
Subject: [E-devel] [elementary] size value checking in elm config
This patch contains size value checks for some functions in elm_config
file.
I think that calling these function with negative size values has no
sense.
SVN revision: 77734
It was always increasing quicklaunch count on init, but
only reducing on shutdown when _elm_init_count is zeroed,
i.e., the quicklaunc_shutdown rountine wasn't being executed.
SVN revision: 77378
With ELM_POLICY_EXIT it's possible to request elementary
to delete all the windows before shutdown instead of just
quitting the main loop.
SVN revision: 77328
It's weird, but looks like wrap mode of the spinner is broken at least
since the move of elm to trunk.
The current code:
if (sd->wrap)
{
while (new_val < sd->val_min)
new_val = sd->val_max + new_val + 1 - sd->val_min;
while (new_val > sd->val_max)
new_val = sd->val_min + new_val - sd->val_max - 1;
}
doesn't seems correct. Since even the documented example would fails:
* E.g.:
* @li min value = 10
* @li max value = 50
* @li step value = 20
* @li displayed value = 20
*
* When the user decrement value (using left or bottom arrow), it will
* displays @c 40, because max - (min - (displayed - step)) is
* @c 50 - (@c 10 - (@c 20 - @c 20)) = @c 40.
With the current code the value will be 41.
It also could lead to values above min, like happens on the first spinner test,
when you could go to -50.5 because new value will become:
250 + (-50.5) + 1 - (-50) in the first while() and later since these value
is bigger then 250, would go back to -50.5 ...
So, a reasonable algorithm would be
if (sd->wrap)
{
if (new_val < sd->val_min)
new_val = sd->val_max + new_val - sd->val_min;
else if (new_val > sd->val_max)
new_val = sd->val_min + new_val - sd->val_max;
}
But it doesn't works fine for cases like the months spinners test, when you
have min = 1, max = 12, step = 1 and each option should be displayed with
wrap. This algorithm would wraps from 1 to 11, so would skip December...
So, I think just going to the max value when min is reached is the better
choice.
if (sd->wrap)
{
if (new_val < sd->val_min)
new_val = sd->val_max;
else if (new_val > sd->val_max)
new_val = sd->val_min;
}
SVN revision: 77278
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 10:04 PM, Bluezery <ohpowel@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear EFL developers,
>
> In current genlist reorder mode, reordering is not moved when
> reordering item is on top or in bottom of within genlist objec because
> of scroller's hold mode.
> After mouse point is moved out of genlist object, then reordering item
> can be moved.
> But in mobile, mouse point can not be moved out of window (if genlist
> item is expanded in window).
> So I add some tweaks to reordering item can be moved when reordering
> item is moved on top item or bottom item.
>
> Please review this patch.
>
> BRs
> Kim.
SVN revision: 77255