Re: [AD] Contribution to Allegro: d_textedit_proc function

[Eric Botcazou <ebotcazou@xxxxxxxxxx>]

[Sorry for the longish delay...]

> The d_textedit_proc is a object derived from d_edit_proc. It displays a
> editbox as d_edit_proc, but it has an extra field to the left that
> allows the program to display a description text. A d_textedit_proc
> object looks like this:
>
>     description_text : editable_text
>
> I'm sending two versions of this function inside to examples (attached
> files exmf1.c and exmf2.c). The function itself is "bracketed" by two
> full line comment (like this /*****.....****/). The /*example program*/
> comment, before the second full line comment ( /*****.....****/ )
> doesn't belong to the function, nor does the first full line comment.
> The first version (in exmf1.c), named d_textedit_proc is the basic
> version of the object. It renders the editable text with the same font
> and colors of the description text.
>
> The second version, named d_textedit_ex_proc (in exmf2.c), is an
> enhacement to the first version, but is still incomplete. Beyond having
> the features of d_textedit_proc, d_textedit_ex_proc allows you to choose
> different colors and font for the editable text. It's still left to be
> implemented the editable text justify and positioning offsets. I will
> bother finishing these features only if this function is accepted.
>
> What do you think. Should only one of these functions be added. Both of
> these functions be added or none of them be added to the library
> (allegro)? Are the names suitable or do you propose a better name? I'm
> open for suggestions.

Are these widgets more than the mere aggregation of the two widgets they 
derive from?  In other words, do these widgets have features that are not 
implementable for their parent widgets?

> I would be very glad to know that I've contributed to Allegro with some
> code, but by the other side (and for the sake of the Allegro community)
> I think these proposed functions should be added to the library only if
> their added functionality makes up for the added library size overhead.
> (If both functions are added to the library, they will add about 150
> lines of source code and 0.5 kB of object code)

I think the criterion for new widgets is the one I stated above.

> Please tell me if the amount of comment is good or excessive or little.
> Tell me also how should I add these functions if they are accepted (via
> CVS in guiproc.c or submitting their source code to someone).

The preferred method is to post patches made with GNU 'diff -up'.

-- 
Eric Botcazou