[maemo-developers] [maemo-developers] Switching between appviews ...

[From: Jorge Souza]

> It seems that the Appview (at least in the current
> public version)
> indeed has some buggy behaviour as a container, I
> encountered some
> wierd assertion failures.
> 
> This however works:
> 
>   gtk_container_remove (GTK_CONTAINER (appview),
> GTK_BIN (appview)->child);

hummmmmmm ... cool. I will try it asap.

> I don't see how you'd manage to have only one
> AppView but two buttons
> in the task navigator? Unless you can register the
> same AppView twice
> (which should be a bug, not a feature ;).

that is exactually what I am doing.

> For the memory part, I don't know exactly how much
> of an overhead it
> introduces but I'd guess it's nowhere near to
> justify the amount of
> hacky-wacky you need to do for it to work properly.

Yeap, It makes sense. The reason to one appview, as I
said before, is that I wonder to share the same menu
between the "appviews" (although, in my case, there is
only one appview emulating a multiple viewers
behaviour). 

So, Aiming to "juggle" this situation, i will try to
share a specific 'menu item' between the appviewers'
menu (yeap ! it is a trigger, i know).

> What comes to the menu part, it is more useful to
> have a menu for each
> view instead of one for all, although it has the
> synchronation
> drawback. Though it should be noted that global
> items need to have
> only the item multiple times, the callback activated
> can of course be
> the same for all global items of the same type.

that is exactually the right direction to follow ;)

> This is basically because if you'd have just one
> menu, you'd have to
> add any menuitem relevant to your app to the menu,
> even if it wouldn't
> have anything to do with the currently visible
> appview and widgets.
> That would be bad usability-wise and also would eat
> screenspace (which
> is not abundant to begin with).
> 
> Unless you'd be into hacky-wacky and alter the menu
> every time the
> appview is switched (which sounds like more work for
> the poor CPU and
> the coder than an enhancement of anything).
 
:D

> Everything is a selection between memory consumption
> and CPU usage
> (which usually also means more burden to the coder).
> For low-end
> machine like this I'd go for memory in this kind of
> small-hit issues
> (let's face it, there won't be over five apps
> running on these
> machines regularly). Plus since the 770 has some
> backgroung-program-magic, it really is not worth it
> IMO to start doing
> anything too hacky.

got it.

Thanks very much , asko and kalle ! I'd really
appreciated your replies !

ps: sorry , my english is too bad, i know :'(

__________________________________________________
Converse com seus amigos em tempo real com o Yahoo! Messenger 
http://br.download.yahoo.com/messenger/