--- Wolfgang Thaller
I'd rather say
data SizeComponent = Fixed Int | Standard type SizeType = (SizeComponent, SizeComponent) (or data SizeType = Size SizeComponent SizeComponent)
On the other hand, might we not want to query the "standard" size, so that we can perhaps use it to align with another widget?
Of course. We should always be able to query the actual size. How about size is not an attribute? Size could be a ro variable. The attribute is the SizePolicy. SizePolicyType = Fixed Int | -- A fixed, nonnegociable size MinimumSuf Int | -- The Int is the minimum but it -- can be expanded but without -- benefit. MinimumExp Int | -- The Int is the minimum and it -- can be expanded with benefit. MaximumShr Int | -- The int is the maximum size and -- it can be shrunk. Preferred Int | -- The Int is the preferred size -- but it can be expanded without -- benefit or shrunk PreferredExp Int | --The int is the preferred size --and it can be expanded with --benefit or shrunk. Standard
Question to all: Who is not familiar either with Java's GridBagLayout or with Tcl's "grid" geometry manager? (BTW: Is XmRowColumn the same thing or something different?) That's the best way of managing dynamic layouts that I know. Any reasons for not using something like that?
I'm used to using HBox's and VBox's. Is a grid as simple as I think it is? If it is . . . HBox, VBox, and GridBox seem to be a good addition. David J. Sankel