[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [PATCH] Proposal to fix NSButtonCell issue with -setFont: -setTitle:
From: |
Quentin Mathé |
Subject: |
Re: [PATCH] Proposal to fix NSButtonCell issue with -setFont: -setTitle: |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Jun 2004 03:24:50 +0200 |
Le 24 juin 04, à 01:19, Fred Kiefer a écrit :
Quentin Mathé wrote:
Le 19 juin 04, à 18:28, Fred Kiefer a écrit :
From what you write, I would rather suggest that we change the
methods (-image) and (-setImage) on NSButtonCell to ignore the cell
type. Or did I miss something?
That would break the OpenStep specification and wouldn't be a very
elegant solution.
Could you please explain how this would break the OpenStep
specification more than any other change that would change the
behaviour in the way you want, e.g. your own patch? This is a real
question, I may just have a blind spot here.
Sorry, I have been confused with this stuff, it would break not the
OpenStep specification but the Cocoa specification… here are the Apple
documentation for the two methods :
- (NSImage *)image
Returns the image displayed by the receiver or nil if the receiver is
not an image-type cell.
- (void)setImage:(NSImage *)image
Sets the image to be displayed by the receiver. If the receiver is not
an image-type cell, the method converts it to that type. If the
receiver is an image-type cell and image is nil or different from the
current one, the image currently held by the receiver is released and
the new one is retained.
And why is it more elegant to change the setFont: and setTitle: method
not to change the cell type than the setImage one?
because bad reason : Apple has done it like that.
because better reason, I think to have setFont: setTitle: and setImage:
which don't change the cell type would be different from the current
GNUstep or Apple solutions but would be more elegant because we would
have no more bad symetry between the three methods, then it's why I
think my patch is a nice solution.
In the proposed solution, the cell type would be edited only by
setImagePosition:, which appears right to me because, a cell type is
more characterized by the potential visibility of the image (which is
under the control of the method setImagePosition:) than by the value of
the image ivar itself (related to setImage: method).
I admit this last point can be discussed.
I seem to totally miss your argument. I am really not saying that one
way is a lot better than the other one, but if you think so (and your
mail suggests this), you should at least provide some argument for it.
I hope it is a bit more clear now.
We should try to find the best solution, not just the one somebody
like best for undisclosed reasons.
Sure.
Quentin.
--
Quentin Mathé
address@hidden