On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:34:36 +0000, Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:37:38 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 15:49:02 +0100, Harold Aling h.aling@home.nl wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 16:12:50 +0100, Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 13:19:18 +0000, Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
I just noticed for Gtk 2.12 (which I don't have yet ;-)) there's an option to hide expanders, which can also disable indentation
- see gtk_tree_view_set_show_expanders(). Perhaps for Gtk 2.12
it could be
I added a hidden pref for this. With hidden expanders there is no more indentation at all, i.e. you can't distinguish between sections and symbols anymore. IMO, a hidden pref is sufficient for that, the documentation is updated. The hidden pref is called: show_symbol_list_expanders, default is TRUE.
I just checked out this hidden pref, and I like it!
Although, it'll probably look a bit better if the headings (Funcions, Variables, etc) were a bit more distinct (bold/darker background/etc).
Ok, I tried a darker background but it doesn't look good with the icons and so I committed some changes to make the section name bold. At the moment this affects also the sections if the expanders are shown. Right now, I'm not sure whether it looks good or whether it should be disabled for the usual view. Any opinions?
I haven't tried it yet, but there's also the option of setting an extra indent when expanders are hidden - this is in the 2.12 API.
Yes of course. I read about while adding the hidden expanders pref. But I forget it again because it only adds an additional indentation but now, with hidden expanders, it's just what we need. Harold and the others, isn't it better to use some small indentation if expanders are hidden instead of bold sections? So, much space is saved by removing the expanders and a little is added to keep it readable.
Regards, Enrico