It's more intuitive to specify the weight as a ratio of the total
weight of all Flexed children than to specify the ratio of the
flexable space.
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
Converting
macro := op.Record(ops)
...
macro.Stop()
macro.Add()
to
macro := op.Record(ops)
...
call := macro.Stop()
call.Add(ops)
Which is more general (call.Add can take a different ops than the op.Record
that started it), and enforced the order between Stop and the subsequent Add.
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
The funcs replace stack.Push and macro.Record, which become private.
This makes stack and macro faster to write, in particular for stacks
where you can just write the following line to save and restore the
state :
defer op.Push(ops).Pop()
This usage requires Push to return a pointer (since Pop has a pointer
receiver), or else the code doesn't compile.
For consistancy, I tried to do the same for op.Record, but this implied
to turn all the MacroOp fields into pointers, and this caused some
panics. As a result, op.Record doesn't return a pointer.
An other side effect pointed by Larry Clapp: StackOp and MacroOp are not
re-usable any more, you have to allocate a new one for each usage, using
the described funcs above.
Signed-off-by: Thomas Bruyelle <thomas.bruyelle@gmail.com>
Change the definition of Widget from the implicit
type Widget func()
to the explicit functional
type Widget func(gtx layout.Context) layout.Dimensions
The advantages are numerous:
- Clearer connection between the incoming context and the output dimensions.
- Returning the Dimensions are impossible to omit.
- Contexts passed by value, so its fields can be exported
and freely mutated by the program.
The only disadvantage is the longer function literals and the many "returns".
What tipped the scales in favour of the explicit Widget variant is that type
aliases can dramatically shorten the literals:
type (
C = layout.Context
D = layout.Dimensions
)
widget := func(gtx C) D {
...
}
Note that the aliases are not part of the Gio API and it is up to each user
whether they want to use them.
Finally the Go proposal for lightweight function literals,
https://github.com/golang/go/issues/21498, may remove the disadvantage
completely in future.
Context becomes a plain struct with only public fields, and its Reset is
replaced by a NewContext convenience constructor.
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
Instead of
type Contraints struct {
Width, Height Constraint
}
use
type Constraints struct {
Min, Max image.Point
}
which leads to simpler use. For example, the Min method is trivally replaced by
the field, and the RigidConstraints constructor is no longer a net win.
API Change. Rewrites:
gofmt -r 'gtx.Constraints.Min() -> gtx.Constraints.Min'
gofmt -r 'gtx.Constraints.Width.Min -> gtx.Constraints.Min.X'
gofmt -r 'gtx.Constraints.Height.Min -> gtx.Constraints.Min.Y'
gofmt -r 'gtx.Constraints.Height.Max -> gtx.Constraints.Max.Y'
gofmt -r 'gtx.Constraints.Width.Max -> gtx.Constraints.Max.X'
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
With the simplification of MacroOp, it is now possible to simplify
the Flex API to just a single Layout method, similar to List:
layout.Flex{}.Layout(gtx,
layout.Rigid(func() { ... }),
layout.Flexed(0.5, func() { ... }),
)
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
The ability to invoke other operation lists belongs in the new CallOp.
While we're here, make MacroOp.Add use a pointer receiver to match the
other methods.
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
Overlapping layouts such as
outer := layout.Flex{}
inner := layout.Stack{}
child := inner.Rigid(gtx, ...)
outerChild := outer.Rigid(gtx, func() {
inner.Layout(gtx, child)
})
outer.Layout(gtx, outerChild)
runs but result in a wrong layout.
This change use empty StackOps to ensure that the Stack and Flex
child layout methods are called in the same scope as their Layout
methods:
outer := layout.Flex{}
inner := layout.Stack{}
outerChild := outer.Rigid(gtx, func() {
child := inner.Rigid(gtx, ...)
inner.Layout(gtx, child)
})
outer.Layout(gtx, outerChild)
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
With Context containing all the necessary information, separate
Init methods no longer makes much sense. Delete them and thereby
remove a source of runtime panics.
Signed-off-by: Elias Naur <mail@eliasnaur.com>
Elias Naur