Re: unnecessary calls to layout functions

On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 04:29, Michael Meeks wrote:
> Hi Reginald,
> On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 17:19, Reginald Melchisedek Poyau wrote:
> > At most Nautilus should only call lay_down_icons_horizontal once to
> > place new icons.  Nautilus should have fixed label and captions areas;
> > captions area would vary according to captions settings
> 	Does that not depend on the 'use tighter layout' option ? I  assumed
> that if you didn't use a 'tight' layout, then this re-sizing would not
> happen; problem I loathe the non-tight layout, pwrt it's propensity to
> leave huge blank areas to the right of the icon view.
> 	Does that make a difference ?
It makes no difference what so ever.  The only difference I see so far
between auto_layout+tight-layout and auto_layout+non-tight-layout is
that the latter uses STANDARD_ICON_GRID_WIDTH as it's default minimum
width for icons i.e. both use lay_down_icons_horizontal function to do

The problem here is that nautilus is using layout functions to update
icon captions.  I pretty sure that nautilus copy operation (I have not
taken look at that code yet) is using an idle function to do its work
which periodically directly or inderectly triggers layout_changed signal

I observe that if gtk is not idle that nautilus seems (it might
actually) to suspend copy operations until gtk become idle, this is in
my opinion is a serious flaw.  Does not gnome-vfs use threads for file
operations anyway?

P.S. I also dont like the non-tight layout for the same reason.  I
dislike also that auto-layout mode does not align the icons by columns,
but I am trying to fix that myself.

> 	Regards,
> 		Michael.
> -- 
>  mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
> -- 
> nautilus-list mailing list
> nautilus-list gnome org
 "There has grown in the minds of certain groups in this country the
idea that just because
a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of
years, the
government and the courts are charged with guaranteeing such profit in
the future, even in
the face of changing circumstances and contrary to public interest. This
strange doctrine
is supported by neither statue or common law. Neither corporations or
individuals have the
right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped,
or turned back."

-Robert Heinlein, Life Line, 1939

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]