Instead of only checking the ignore_hidden flag when getting the
preferred sizes, respect it already when constructing the list of
widgets. This way, widgets don't queue resizes for groups they're
ignored in anyway.
For loops to loop over lists look nicer and actually do the right thing
with "break" and "continue" statements. So they are vastly preferred to
while loops.
This simplifies code and because sizes are cached by the widgets
themselves, it's not a large performance problem (unless people use huge
amounts of widgets in a single size group, but who does that?
The main problem is that we were emitting the row-deleted signal for the model in the middle
of the process that actually deletes the row from the model (remove the row from the array,
update the model->file_lookup hash table, etc.). In the model's caller, one of the row-deleted
callbacks was requesting an iter, which caused the model to revalidate itself - but it did
this while it was in an inconsistent state. This led to an assertion failure later when the
model resorted itself.
The fix in remove_file() is like this:
* The filteredness/visibility of the deleted node is not updated. The
node will simply be gone; we don't need to update those values at
all.
* We invalidate just the node that is being deleted.
* The model->file_lookup hash table is not completely nuked; instead,
we carefully adjust its indices.
* The row-deleted signal is only emitted at the very end, when
deletion is complete and the model is consistent.
Many thanks to William Hua for doing the detective work on this bug!
Signed-off-by: Federico Mena Quintero <federico@gnome.org>
They were in the semi-public API of GtkFileSystemModel, but never actually used outside of it.
Signed-off-by: Federico Mena Quintero <federico@gnome.org>
This is a function internal to the file system model; let's not pollute the gtk_tree_path namespace.
Also, make the 'i' variable into 'r' as it refers to a row index, not a file-array index (for
consistency with the docs and the rest of the code).
Signed-off-by: Federico Mena Quintero <federico@gnome.org>
Right now we support loading and recoloring symbolic GFileIcons, but
only if the underlying GFile has a local path. This breaks when the
GFileIcon is loaded from a GResource, which is a reasonable option for an
application that wants to ship a custom symbolic icon.
This patch changes GtkIconInfo to store a GFile together with the file
path, and changes the symbolic icon lookup code to use the GFile URI,
which transparently makes the code work also for GResources.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=687059
Move variable initialization outside the first code with side effects.
This allows adding some more early returns, including one for code that
used to trigger g_return_if_fail() in certain corner cases.
Old code tried to use the "background-image" proeprty for setting the
default image background. While this used to work in the early days of
GTK3, today it is grossly misleading as the backgronud image may be
resized, repositioned and semi-translucent which causes very weird
artifacts when rendering.
So we use the background-color only instead.
This way we create one provider per settings object instead of stuffing
it into a global unchanging never-deleting hash table.
Also, we now reload the theme when instructed instead of keeping the old
loaded (and possibly stale) data forever.
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=683896
This makes sure the full theme loading logic resides in one function and
isn't scattered around.
As a side-effect, the hash table kept by gtk_css_provider_get_named()
will now be populated with fallback themes. This will not be a problem
after the next commit though.
Split maintaining the global themes hash table and the theme loading
code into two functions.
This also fixes leaking the provider when loading a theme from a builtin
resource.
libxkbcommon has had some changes to its API. However, it now has a
stable release (0.2.0), so this makes the necessary changes, and
replaces all uses of the deprecated API.
Signed-off-by: Ran Benita <ran234@gmail.com>
Themes may want to render handles differently depending on whether
the widget is in selection mode (2 handles enclosing a selection) or
cursor mode (one handle pointing out the insertion cursor).
