In https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=601425 the annotations
were changed to int as they not only take the predefined enum values
but also user defined values registered through gtk_icon_size_register()
As a result the typelib doesn't contain any information about
GtkIconSize for those arguments and the Python docstring only
shows the corresponding Python type "int".
This changes the argument docs to mention the type explicitly
so the Python doc generator can add a link to Gtk.IconSize
which contains the most useful predefined values.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=757411
Instead of just listing the return type of get_plus_button() and
get_minus_button() in the documentation, we can use the (type)
annotation to ensure that the introspection data reflects the actual
type of the returned widget.
On regular scrolling (ie. not natural scrolling), positive deltas in the
Y axis (downwards) should actually move the value towards the adjustment
minimum value to be more intuitive. This also makes the scrolling
directions match between the button and the popped up scale.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=736830
In practice this shape is only used to outline the popover when it is
above native windows, in the most normal full-csw case the shape won't apply
visibly, so popovers will still be able to cast a shadow there.
If there are native windows below the popover, the shape will exclude the
shadow, so there are no alpha contents above the window. One worst case that
might happen is that the popover lays above patches of native/client-side
windows, so the shadow could come and go around the border. But first let's
see whether that happens often or visibly enough before adding something more
convoluted.
This hideous hack is necessary so far because the main users of
GtkScaleButton are also clutter users, so the GtkScaleButton popover
will be very likely shaped against a clutter-enabled native window.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=723556
We rename the gtk_widget_class_bind_template_child{_internal}
macros by appending a _private to their name. Otherwise, it
would be too magic to pass the 'public' names as arguments,
but affect a member of the Private struct. At the same time,
Add two new macros with the old names,
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_child{_internal} that operate
on members of the instance struct.
The macros and functions are inconsistently named, and are not tied to
the "template" concept - to the point that it seems plausible to use
them without setting the template.
The new naming scheme is as follows:
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_child_full
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_callback_full
With the convenience macros:
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_child
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_child_internal
gtk_widget_class_bind_template_callback
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700898https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700896
Using an offset from the struct means you can have children in
both the public and private (via G_PRIVATE_OFFSET) parts of the
instance. It also matches the new private macros nicer.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=702563
Signed-off-by: Emmanuele Bassi <ebassi@gnome.org>
I'm adding a bunch of fixes for gcc complaining about
-Wmissing-declarations.
This set of patches makes private classes in gtk/*.c that use
G_DEFINE_TYPE() safe by adding definitions for the get_type() function
that can't be made static.
