Code::Blocks

Developer forums (C::B DEVELOPMENT STRICTLY!) => Development => Topic started by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 09:04:59 pm

Title: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 09:04:59 pm
error on DevPakUpdater on this line :
   m_PluginInfo.hasConfigure = true;

error : struct PLuginInfo has no member named 'hasConfigure'.

Also weird : double clicking on this error entry in the list, does not jump to the error in the code !!!
The build was 'tried' with rev 1827

[edit] : same for exporter plug-in; some header file not up to date yet in svn ??
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: mandrav on January 22, 2006, 09:10:16 pm
Yes, please wait to finish committing everything :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 09:13:46 pm
okido, just saw the arrival of the global vars ;-)

yes, indeed : you are being watched :twisted:
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 22, 2006, 09:23:09 pm
I am not sure that the global vars are guilty. I have updated to rev1832 and had the same problems (As with rev1830). My original post was here (http://forums.codeblocks.org/index.php?topic=2090.msg16430;boardseen#new).

Michael

PS.: Sorry for double/cross posting :oops:.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: thomas on January 22, 2006, 09:24:24 pm
It is a different issue, but the reply is the same. :)
This one is fixed in 1833.


And yes, there are a couple more issues, we know about them :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 09:24:47 pm
no no, they are not guilty, but in the meantime, that was checked in (rev 1832)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 09:29:34 pm
btw, cross posting : can anyone make the 'codeblocks.org' see the correct changes to the forum ??
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 22, 2006, 09:44:03 pm
I have compiled rev1833 and all was fine :), but when after starting C::B, I have remarked a problem in the menu Settings. The problem is that I have only:


I have not Debugger and Plugins.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Ceniza on January 22, 2006, 09:49:29 pm
I have compiled rev1833 and all was fine :), but when after starting C::B, I have remarked a problem in the menu Settings. The problem is that I have only:

  • Environment
  • Editor
  • Global variables

I have not Debugger and Plugins.

Michael


The whole idea with the coming changes is to move those entries and centralize configuration. I just wonder if the button or menu item is already somewhere... Gonna compile r1833 right now :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: 280Z28 on January 22, 2006, 09:53:19 pm
I have compiled rev1833 and all was fine :), but when after starting C::B, I have remarked a problem in the menu Settings. The problem is that I have only:

  • Environment
  • Editor
  • Global variables

I have not Debugger and Plugins.

Michael


They're in the environment setting dialog.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 22, 2006, 09:53:33 pm
The whole idea with the coming changes is to move those entries and centralize configuration. I just wonder if the button or menu item is already somewhere... Gonna compile r1833 right now :)

Ok, I understand :). Thank you for the explanation.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 22, 2006, 09:55:38 pm
They're in the environment setting dialog.

Thank you :).

And the new setting system is really COOL :D. I like it. I will try it tomorrow.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Ceniza on January 22, 2006, 10:08:32 pm
Yeah, looks nice, but now I wonder if they could add a button in the toolbar to get quick acess to it :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: mandrav on January 22, 2006, 10:13:52 pm
Yeah, looks nice, but now I wonder if they could add a button in the toolbar to get quick acess to it :)

Keep on wondering ;)
The full power has not yet being unveiled...
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: sethjackson on January 22, 2006, 10:24:35 pm
Yeah, looks nice, but now I wonder if they could add a button in the toolbar to get quick acess to it :)

Keep on wondering ;)
The full power has not yet being unveiled...

Oh my sooooo sweeeet.  8)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Ceniza on January 22, 2006, 10:27:50 pm
Rick and I suggest centering the new Settings dialog. Could that single line of code be added? :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: sethjackson on January 22, 2006, 10:37:09 pm
Rick and I suggest centering the new Settings dialog. Could that single line of code be added? :)

Yeah I agree... The Editor dialog is centered, but not the Environment one.....
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: killerbot on January 22, 2006, 11:11:06 pm
looks great.
don't want to spoil the fun,  aren't those icons in the settings dialog, not a bit too big ??
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: sethjackson on January 22, 2006, 11:22:37 pm
looks great.
don't want to spoil the fun,  aren't those icons in the settings dialog, not a bit too big ??

I think they are fine........ 
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: takeshi miya on January 22, 2006, 11:54:22 pm
The icons are GIANT :lol:. I'll recommend 32x32, max limit 64x64.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: 280Z28 on January 23, 2006, 12:06:18 am
The icons are GIANT :lol:. I'll recommend 32x32, max limit 64x64.

I like big, but not that big. 64x64 would be good. :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: sethjackson on January 23, 2006, 12:09:26 am
The icons are GIANT :lol:. I'll recommend 32x32, max limit 64x64.

I think 32x32 might be a tad too small...... That is just my opinion though.....
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: takeshi miya on January 23, 2006, 12:09:36 am
I think 48x48 will do the trick. Remember that there will go all plugins settings, and the list will be very large.
Right now with 80x80 you have to scroll 4 times to get from beginning to end.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: thomas on January 23, 2006, 12:34:22 am
80x80 is enough of a challenge already.

However, you are not forced to stick with this, you can always design your own 48x48 icon set and replace the icons if you don't like the stock set :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: takeshi miya on January 23, 2006, 03:17:54 am
80x80 is enough of a challenge already.

However, you are not forced to stick with this, you can always design your own 48x48 icon set and replace the icons if you don't like the stock set :)

Heh, you wanted it to be that easy, but that requieres a full recompile: :)
Code: C++
  1. wxImageList* images = new wxImageList(80, 80);

48x48 Icons:
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/8361/settings48x488sk.png) (http://imageshack.us)

64x64 Icons:
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/9311/settings64x649od.png) (http://imageshack.us)

80x80 Icons:
(http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/7794/settings80x800zk.png) (http://imageshack.us)

Choose your destiny. 8)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 23, 2006, 10:49:25 am
Choose your destiny. 8)

IMHO 48x48 or 64x64 would be good :D.

Anyway, I feel a bit uncomfortable that the setting of plugins has been put within the Environment settings. IMHO, it would be better to let plugin outside as a separate entry (just to separate C::B core configuration from plugins configuration). Moreover, if more plugins would be added this would make the list rather huge and not so friendly if you would like to change the option of one plugin. May it would be possible to do as e.g., Eclipse. Main category --> collapsed --> sub-categories and so one.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Urxae on January 23, 2006, 11:10:16 am
[screenshots]

Would this be a bad time to mention that those icons don't look like that on Windows 2000? There are black boxes around them. Lousy Alpha transparancy support strikes again. :?

(http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/5954/settings2ff.png)

Oh, and I take issue with the "Disabled dialogs" icon calling me insane just for wanting to know what it says :P.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: takeshi miya on January 23, 2006, 11:15:01 am
Choose your destiny. 8)

IMHO 48x48 or 64x64 would be good :D.

Anyway, I feel a bit uncomfortable that the setting of plugins has been put within the Environment settings. IMHO, it would be better to let plugin outside as a separate entry (just to separate C::B core configuration from plugins configuration). Moreover, if more plugins would be added this would make the list rather huge and not so friendly if you would like to change the option of one plugin. May it would be possible to do as e.g., Eclipse. Main category --> collapsed --> sub-categories and so one.

Michael


Yes, something like "plugins categories" will be necessary in the future. Right now, C::B doesn't have 5000 plugins like Eclipse, so it is not necesary, but in the future...

Anyways, I think something like aMule (uses wxWidgets) uses is more comfortable (no need to scroll):
(http://www.amule.org/scr/amule-scr-prefs-gui.png)

Or if having "Plugin Categories", a TreeCtrl would be better even. :)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 23, 2006, 11:22:48 am
Anyway, I feel a bit uncomfortable that the setting of plugins has been put within the Environment settings. IMHO, it would be better to let plugin outside as a separate entry (just to separate C::B core configuration from plugins configuration). Moreover, if more plugins would be added this would make the list rather huge and not so friendly if you would like to change the option of one plugin. May it would be possible to do as e.g., Eclipse. Main category --> collapsed --> sub-categories and so one.
Anyways, I think something like aMule (uses wxWidgets) uses is more comfortable (no need to scroll):
Or if having "Plugin Categories", a TreeCtrl would be better even. :)

Yes, something like aMule or TreeCtrl would be a good solution :D.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: thomas on January 23, 2006, 12:57:43 pm
Would this be a bad time to mention that those icons don't look like that on Windows 2000? There are black boxes around them. Lousy Alpha transparancy support strikes again. :?
Yes it would, but don't worry, everybody else is discussing this stuff too, although they had been told it is not finished... :lol:

For now, we won't be able to do anything about that issue. Once the preferences redesign is finished (so we are sure that we won't change the background colour any more), we can remove transparency alltogether and blend the icons against the background colour.
Using 8-bit transparency as a workaround is no option in this case, as this would very significantly affect image quality (a lot of alpha transparency is used in these).

Anyway, I feel a bit uncomfortable that the setting of plugins has been put within the Environment settings.
At the risk of being repetitive... it is not finished yet. A couple of things will still be subject to change. Very likely, plugins will also be classified in some manner. Compiler and debugger, for example, although technically plugins, are as good as "core", so they should not be hidden among a multitude of other plugins in the end.
Moving all non-core plugins to a separate dialog is possible, and likely to be done. At the present time, this is still work in progress.

Heh, you wanted it to be that easy, but that requieres a full recompile: :)
Au contraire, mon capitaine.
It is in fact a lot more complicated. If you want to use 48x48 icons (or 64x64), then you will have to design them for that size. You cannot just scale the existing ones down, it does not work like this.
The reason why the icons have the size they have is that you are unable to see certain details below a certain size (as it happens, this is not visible in your screenshot, but it will be quite visible in some of the others). The smaller the target size, the harder it is to get everything right, as you have to make more and more abstractions to reduce the level of detail.
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: Michael on January 23, 2006, 01:11:34 pm
Anyway, I feel a bit uncomfortable that the setting of plugins has been put within the Environment settings.
At the risk of being repetitive... it is not finished yet. A couple of things will still be subject to change. Very likely, plugins will also be classified in some manner. Compiler and debugger, for example, although technically plugins, are as good as "core", so they should not be hidden among a multitude of other plugins in the end.
Moving all non-core plugins to a separate dialog is possible, and likely to be done. At the present time, this is still work in progress.

Thank you very much for the explanation :). Yes, I agree that core plugins should not be hidden among all the other plugins. Core plugins should be kept possibly within (or near :)) the "core". The other might or should be kept separate.

Michael
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: takeshi miya on January 23, 2006, 01:24:33 pm
we can remove transparency alltogether and blend the icons against the background colour.
Hardcoding (blending) to white colour will look ok on Windows 2000, but they will look really horrible in other systems that haves the background colour of the ListBook different. For example, in the (future) wxMac port of C::B. They will look even worse than in w2k.
So neither options are great. Icons with alpha is not easy...

Very likely, plugins will also be classified in some manner.
Plugins categories. :)

Moving all non-core plugins to a separate dialog is possible, and likely to be done. At the present time, this is still work in progress.
I like the centralized way as it's now (everything in one dialog), and certainly having settings categories will help to not requiere to make separate dialogs.

The smaller the target size, the harder it is to get everything right, as you have to make more and more abstractions to reduce the level of detail.

While that's correct, it isn't important when we can't even get icons with (or without for this matter) alpha right.

I think that the alpha-icon-problem-on-windows-2000 should be solved from the wxWidgets side this way: When loading a png, it should always dither the alpha channel to the background colour. That means converting icons 32->24 bits in real time (on systems that doesn't support alpha icons, that is).
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: .angelo on January 23, 2006, 09:10:36 pm
48x48px is imo best way... 64x64 for me, are too big. (1024x768 resolution)
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: EugenioR on May 16, 2011, 09:55:49 am
Heh, you wanted it to be that easy, but that requieres a full recompile: :)
Au contraire, mon capitaine.
It is in fact a lot more complicated. If you want to use 48x48 icons (or 64x64), then you will have to design them for that size. You cannot just scale the existing ones down, it does not work like this.
The reason why the icons have the size they have is that you are unable to see certain details below a certain size (as it happens, this is not visible in your screenshot, but it will be quite visible in some of the others). The smaller the target size, the harder it is to get everything right, as you have to make more and more abstractions to reduce the level of detail.

Hi! :)
Why this complicated? Before reading this thread, I went to /usr/share/codeblocks/images/settings and did
Code: [Select]
for FF in `ls`; do sudo convert $FF -resize 35% $FF; doneAfter this, the icons in settings dialog were fine (attached screenshot). Am I destroying something?...
And this is still too big for an average 13,3'' screen (my vertical resolution is 768 and still have to scroll... please note there are two scrollbars, quite annoying).
Any way to have lateral icons?

  Eugenio

[attachment deleted by admin]
Title: Re: rev 1831 does not build
Post by: MortenMacFly on May 16, 2011, 08:26:32 pm
Any way to have lateral icons?
Not without modifying the sources.

Next time,m please do not hijack a 5 year old thread, please!

I've locked this topic now.