Summary:
Efl.Ui.Layout namespace is removed to keep consistency with other
widgets.
Consequently, "Efl.Ui.Layout.Object" is renamed to "Efl.Ui.Layout" and
"Efl.Ui.Layout." is renamed to "Efl.Ui.Layout_".
Reviewers: segfaultxavi, bu5hm4n, cedric
Reviewed By: segfaultxavi
Subscribers: #reviewers, #committers, SanghyeonLee, woohyun
Tags: #efl
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D7291
Summary:
For now, how to check whether a widget is legacy or not
is to check flags in private data or static flag, which is set
during elm_legacy_add.
If Efl.Ui.Legacy interface is added, it can be easilly checked
by efl_isa(obj, EFL_UI_LEGACY_INTERFACE)
Reviewers: woohyun, jpeg, cedric, Jaehyun_Cho
Subscribers: conr2d, cedric, jpeg
Differential Revision: https://phab.enlightenment.org/D5748
When I first implemented the Efl.Container interface I made a mistake of
mixing "single slot" content API's with "multiple children" content
API's. This should fix that, by separating API's that are for a single
part and those that deal with a list of children.
Efl.Content: Single slot. This will be used a lot by efl_part()
objects, and for the default content of widgets (eg. the window
content).
Efl.Container: Multiple children. Used by lists, boxes, layouts
(edje/elm), etc...
I didn't see any class that implemented both interfaces (note: Layout
implements Container and Button implements Content, so technically
Button implements both through inheritance).
For now the eo_prefix is not changed in Efl.Container. I wonder if it
should be reset (to efl_container) or not. This would only affect the C
API.
Ref T5328
Thanks @JackDanielZ for the report!
This makes efl_content_set/get/unset APIs work on the inwin, even though
this is a legacy-only widget (at least right now).
Some names have not been changed, hopefully making a distinction
between legacy APIs and internal code (elm_layout_blah) and valid EO
usages.
This means many internal functions are still elm_layout_ as their
sole purpose is to support the legacy API.
Ref T5315
elm_layout_sizing_eval() marks an object as requiring recalc.
Unfortunately, it's been massively abused by various widgets into
actually doing the calc, or the min calc. So we end up with one API
that has 3 different definitions depending on the widget type:
1. Mark as requiring recalc (correct, respects doc, elm_layout)
2. Calculate min size and other size hints
3. Actually do some geometry modification
I believe we need to clarify these 3 requirements into 3 very clear
and specific APIs in elementary. Right now we have similar functions
in evas for 1 (evas_object_smart_changed) and 3 (smart_calculate).
But their exact definition also isn't necessarily what we want for
elementary.
Another clear problem is that layout_eval does not do any calculation
(in theory), so the "eval" word is a bit of a stretch here.
Once we're sure about the exact API we want, we can add this back to
EO and make it work across our EO widgets. For now let's just keep
the legacy API, and its EO overrides, as is.
Ref T5315
once this widget is visible, It should handle the focus of its children
and leave no option to the underlaying widgets to gain focus.
This is implemented by making it a redirect when it gets visible.
This touches Edje and also Elementary where part names are used.
This commit blew up in size since now all content part APIs
(get, set, unset) require to use Efl.Part instead.
This is a big refactoring commit, but no logic should
have been changed. Fingers crossed.
This removes the conflicts between the different parents and also
indicates that this is to be used internally by widgets and should
not be confused with the normal user visible parent.
It is an internal attribute that should not be used by people
not implementing widgets. Marking it as protected signifies it
as such.
Marcel Hollerbach
Jaehyun Cho
Xavi Artigas
Sungtaek Hong
Amitesh Singh
Jean-Philippe Andre
Marcel Hollerbach
Daniel Kolesa
Stefan Schmidt
Tom Hacohen
Cedric BAIL