World: r3wp

ok, then I like new aproach more ...

BTW what was the difference if you had:
faced: [area-color: red] ?


In the end the 'area-color was local to each style as well in face/facets. 
In Rebol you cannnot have mixed 'shared' and 'local' values of direct 
type in one object together.

(the only way how to make 'shared' values is using indirect values 
(object! string! binary! block! etc.)

I think that the difference would exist in the dialect translation 
phase, when new style is instantiated? If there is 'faced, it would 
be in object field, whereas where in facets, it would be in some 
subobject = shared.Well,but then I don't know, how accessor would 
look-up style attributes, if those would exist in two places, but 
you have to somehow solve it with 'intern too ...

Don't loose your time with further explanations, time to read sources 
and do few tests ... some things will become obvious, some not, and 
then I''ll ask ...

From our expereinece with R3GUI styles, properties that user should 
easily access (like colors etc.) are meant to be usually local to 
each face inastance. That's for what FACES are good enough. If style 
creator think he could 'save' some memory by using shared values 
among faces of the style then he(she) can use the INTERN 'shared 
context' as storage.

BTW how is the R3GUI demo conversion is going? ;)

not going at all - coming home from work at 19:00 and later :-) First 
thing I want to try is trying to play with different draw blocks 
:-) E.g. trying to "port" Carl's button :-)

playing with draw blocks? - I thought that's a task for your dog 
:-)

exactly - Charlie is going to be here too :-)

Simply put - it is supposed to be a fun. We (rebol community) forgot 
about the fun a long time ago :-) I looked in some R2 demos, and 
was amazed - we need new demo contest, and the condition is simple 
- R3 only :-)

Any tip of how to play with gradients, trying to simulate some existing 
ones? IIRC, there was some R2 script? In the end I would like to 
mimick my HTC sense environment, as I like it and it looks decent, 
albeit maybe too white - http://204.145.67.138/shared/ScreenShots.png

got to go, later ...

Oldes, you have to reload, for new stuff to appear on the website. 
I noticed also some docs are released (resizing). What about publishing 
even doc, which is in WIP format included in the archive? Well, but 
that would probably mean maintaining two versions - MDP one, plus 
WIP for rebol.com ...

We are working on it.

OK, good to hear. OTOH - what is the stage of acceptance of RMA's 
stuff into official RT distro? Any discussions with Carl yet? I know 
that you will continue working on your version anyway, just curious 
....

No action so far.

Question towards style tagging. I noticed some styles are tagged 
as 'internal, and some as 'compound. I would like to know, if it 
serves any other purpose, than for style listing/grouping, to distinguish 
it? 'Internal is probably just a tag, but does 'compound has any 
meaning further down in the code?

they are opposites. a 'compound style may not necessarily be 'internal, 
but may consist of 'internal faces. an 'internal face can be 'compound, 
but is not necessarily that.

And, the tag system is generic to flag styles as necessary.

That one looks weird :-)

styl: guie/styles/:style

Styl
 is czech translation of english "style" :-)

I can see you use empty rows to separate some items in facets block. 
Why is that? I did not find any example of 'internt being used, so 
I think that might be the reason? To simply separate/group some items? 
Aren't we wasting memory here?

Doc style is buggy - doubles the content:

view [doc "test"]

I am still not sure I am comfort with group having different semantics 
to panel :-( .... trying to do some tests with Carl's demo, and it 
is going to be pain-in-the a..., to insert returns in there. From 
the very beginning of the R3 GUI projects my opinion was, that group 
should be just de-stylised panel (no visual borders), but identical 
in behaviour ...

I hope I will change my mind later in the proces ....

Hmm, but then we would probably loose flexibility of different layout 
model if those two were identical ...

rendering/refresh bug -  view [vpanel [text "test"]] ... I can see 
the content of underlying window next to the vpanel ....

I can see, that along the min-size, max-size parameters, we can now 
set init-size parameter. Why was option to set max-size removed from 
panel? Because resizing system does take care for that? I also noticed, 
that make-panel can't anymore accept options block. So you found 
it not being necessary?

btw Pekr, from an API designer's standpoint, these types of questions 
are all very good  IMHO.  they force us to reflect on decisions and, 
often, trying to do so will either confirm them or with discussion 
might give new ideas.   I'm not part of this gui team, but I'd really 
like if someone asked pointy questions like this on my stuff.

(I'd really like == I really like it)

those come from concrete effort to make Carl's demo translated to 
the new GUI engine  :-) First and second screen is displayed, but 
make-panel just differs, and options argument does not exist anymore, 
it also has reverse order of arguments, and does not accept style, 
but face instead, and so on ...

are you supposed to use make-panel?

Henrik, when switching panels, there's following function I need 
to adapt:

	unless pan [
		pan: make-panel 'group pick test-blocks index [columns: 1]
		poke test-panels index pan
	]

1) make-panel does not accept third options argument anymore
2) the first two args are reversed

3) make-panel does not accept block (style) anymore, but a face object 
- I don't know how to do this one yet ...

I simply need to make a block with layout elements a face. Trying 
with make-face, but make-face accepts two arguments - style name, 
and options, I don't know what should I submit for the name ...

I translated it into:

	unless pan [

  pan: make-panel make-face 'vpanel (pick test-blocks index) 'group 
		poke test-panels index pan
	]

why make-panel reversed arguments? It is now different to make-face 
in that regard. Carl's version accepts the word argument first.

It should be either put back, or make-face should change argument 
order too ...

I changed it to:

	unless pan [

  pan: make-panel make-face 'vpanel (pick test-blocks index) 'group 
		poke test-panels index pan
	]

But something is "not bound" ... I get following error:

** Script error: when has no value

** Where: make make make-face unless view-sub-panel do switch -apply- 
apply if f

oreach if do-face switch do do-bind-actor actor all foreach do-style 
set-face sw

itch do do-bind-actor actor all foreach do-style case do-event do-event 
do-event

 either -apply- wake-up loop -apply- wait do-events if view catch 
 either either
-apply- do

** Near: make styl/facets opts options: make object! any [opts []] 
ta...

hmm, I go the wrong way ... make-face serves different purpose, not 
to insert layout into panel ....

Guys, please don't remove help string from functions (make-panel) 
....

I think switching panels is much simpler than you're trying here. 
Try looking at the source for tab panel.

make-panel is an internal function.

you made it so ....

the interface was really nice:

make-panel: funct [
	"Create a panel from layout dialect block and options block."
	style [word! none!]
	content [block! none!] "Contents of the panel"
	options [object! block! map! none!] "Options of the panel"
][

and you made it:

make-panel: func [
	face [object!]
	layout-type [word!]
][

not commented, func instead of funct, removed options, reversed arguments, 
and made it accept face instead of the layout block. You should not 
excuse something by just stating - don't use it, it is just internal 
function ... what if I want to use make-panel?

I don't think you want to. The point, I think, is to use the CONTENT 
functions.

My question still persist - how do I easily create a panel from a 
layout block? :-) Instead of one nice funcitons, which served well, 
I need to study  different concept, and make-panel is generally not 
usefull to average mortal :-)

OK, I'll continue tomorrow ... I can see content fields - dunno so 
far if it is kind of equivalent to R2's pane, or what ... need to 
find content handling functions ....

uhhh,enough for today :-) "set-panel-content face get-facet face 
'panel-face" - I need pizza, to get back some imagination :-)