[Geany-devel] Empty project properties dialog

Jiří Techet techet at xxxxx
Sun Feb 19 23:35:24 UTC 2012

On Sun, Feb 19, 2012 at 17:57, Jiří Techet <techet at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 21:16, Jiří Techet <techet at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 22:57, Lex Trotman <elextr at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 3:12 AM, Matthew Brush <mbrush at codebrainz.ca> wrote:
>>>> On 01/13/2012 03:31 AM, Lex Trotman wrote:
>>>>> [...]
>>>>>> What if we deprecate the old project create/confirm API altogether, add
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> project preferences dialog to GeanyMainWidgets structure, and just let
>>>>>> plugins use the "response", "hide" and "show" signals on it as a normal
>>>>>> GtkDialog?
>>>>> Sounds fine to my limited understanding.
>>>>>> This wasn't possible before when the dialog was created/destroyed each
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> since the pointer in the main_widgets global would change all the time,
>>>>>> but
>>>>>> now it'll stay the same right from before `geany-startup-complete` all
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> way until after plugins are unloaded . We could even say with certainty
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> this API *won't ever* change, the project dialog in main_widgets would
>>>>>> *always* be a (subclass of) GtkDialog and so would only break if GTK+
>>>>>> broke
>>>>>> this.
>>>>> But how much of the internal structure of the dialog are you going to
>>>>> document?
>>>>> Is Jiri expected to find the notebook widget within the dialog or will
>>>>> it be passed some other way? If from the dialog it needs to be
>>>>> documented (or at least its name does).
>>>> Yeah, I thought about this after I sent the last message. We would need to
>>>> add the dialog *and* the dialog's notebook to the main_widgets struct, like
>>>> we do with the other notebooks (doc, sidebar, msgwin). Otherwise we'd have
>>>> to guarantee a name so it could be accessed through ui_lookup_widget() or do
>>>> the "signals on the wrong object" thing like is done for most signals (with
>>>> the renames Jiri proposed).
>>> Well I'd say the first or second, but Jiri or others may have a
>>> different preference.
>> I don't really care - both versions would work. But I too prefer using
> So finally I had some free time to test and listening on the dialog
> signals doesn't work as I need. The the code for displaying project
> dialog in Geany looks like this:
>        while (gtk_dialog_run(GTK_DIALOG(e.dialog)) == GTK_RESPONSE_OK)
>        {
>                if (update_config(&e, FALSE))
>                {
> Now when I connect to the dialog signals, they get emitted on the line
>        while (gtk_dialog_run(GTK_DIALOG(e.dialog)) == GTK_RESPONSE_OK)
> which means that in the signal handler I don't have access to the
> updated config values from the dialog because these are updated
> afterwards by
>                if (update_config(&e, FALSE))
> So if there aren't any objections, I'll go back to the implementation
> I originally suggested and which emits the signal only after the
> config has been successfully updated.

I've created new pull request with the changes here:


If you are interested, these are the changes made to GProject:



More information about the Devel mailing list