- Dillo-dev - lists.mailman3.com

what's currently broken in dillo

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:57:50PM +0000, eocene wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:54:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching > > > the itch! ;) > > > > > > FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. > > > > Committed. > > If I go to a page that has a Fl_Input, give focus to the input, move the > cursor out of the dillo window, and move it back into the dillo window, > focus does not return to the input. Committed a new patch. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Nov. 19, 2014

Strange linebreaking when long hyphenated words appear in table cells

by sgeerken＠dillo.org

On Fr, Nov 14, 2014, Jeremy Henty wrote: > The attached file demonstrates the problem. The test in the first > paragraph easily linebreaks to fit the width of the window because of > the potential linebreaks after each hyphen. The same text inside of a > table cell forces the cell to be almost as wide as the unbroken text, > although some line breaking does happen. > > My guess is that Dillo calculates the minimum width of the table cell > without accounting for potential linebreaks after hyphens in the text. > However, when it later fills the cell with the text it does allow > linebreaks after hyphens. This is correct. There are several reasons for ignoring hyphenation (both implicit and explicit, as here) when calculating the minimal width. First, it would make hyphenation of all words necessary, not (as now) the ones around feasible line breaks. Furthermore, there are problems with layout tables (altough becoming more and more extinct); there has been some discussion on this list, IIRC. > If that is correct then I think Dillo > should account for potential linebreaks after hyphens both when > calculating the minimum width of the cell See above. > and when filling the cell with text. This is actually done, as you see. The long "aaaaa-aaaaa-..." is broken, within the width which has been calculated before for the table cell width. > The current situation is inconsistent and can deliver very > poor results. Changing one of the above (minimal width, or hyphenation within table cells) will probably do more harm than good, so I'd leave it as it is, unless there are really severe reasons, as real-world web pages which are unreadable. Sebastian

Nov. 19, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by eocene＠gmx.com

Jorge wrote: > On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:57:50PM +0000, eocene wrote: > > Jorge wrote: > > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:54:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > > Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching > > > > the itch! ;) > > > > > > > > FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. > > > > > > Committed. > > > > If I go to a page that has a Fl_Input, give focus to the input, move the > > cursor out of the dillo window, and move it back into the dillo window, > > focus does not return to the input. > > OK, now I have code that also works for this case... > > If you have another interesting test case like this, please let > me know now (before I send it to you for the final reality checks). I can't think of anything in particular right now...

Nov. 18, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 05:57:50PM +0000, eocene wrote: > Jorge wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:54:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > > Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching > > > the itch! ;) > > > > > > FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. > > > > Committed. > > If I go to a page that has a Fl_Input, give focus to the input, move the > cursor out of the dillo window, and move it back into the dillo window, > focus does not return to the input. OK, now I have code that also works for this case... If you have another interesting test case like this, please let me know now (before I send it to you for the final reality checks). -- Cheers Jorge.-

Nov. 18, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by eocene＠gmx.com

Jorge wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:54:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > > Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching > > the itch! ;) > > > > FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. > > Committed. If I go to a page that has a Fl_Input, give focus to the input, move the cursor out of the dillo window, and move it back into the dillo window, focus does not return to the input.

Nov. 18, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by jcid＠dillo.org

On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 01:54:46PM -0300, Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 05:17:06AM +0000, eocene wrote: > > Jeremy wrote: > > > The Dillo source does something a little devious. It refers to > > > fl_oldfocus, but this symbol is not declared in any header, it is just > > > shared between two *.c files via an extern declaration (with a comment > > > that this is a hack to make Fl_Group work). Something has changed in > > > libfltk.so to stop the linker finding this symbol. I don't know what > > > (I am not experienced in debugging linking failures.) > > > > To the best of my recollection, something tricky was necessary because > > Fl_Group didn't have the idea that the group itself could have focus > > instead of one of the children. I can't immediately see how to get it > > to work right without fl_oldfocus, but if we can't link, we have nothing, > > so I'll take out fl_oldfocus, and hopefully someone will figure out > > something at some point... > > Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching > the itch! ;) > > FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. Committed. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Nov. 18, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

Jorge Arellano Cid wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 05:33:41PM +0000, Jeremy Henty wrote: > > > > Should we release 3.0.5 to fix this for distro users? Otherwise their > > dillo will break when their distro updates to a FLTK-1.3.3 *.so . > > IMHO current repo is not as stable as it should for a new release. > > I'd pack a 3.0.4.1 with the fix for FLTK-1.3.3. That was what I had in mind. Sorry if that was not clear. > The repo has more than enough for a version bump when its moment > comes! I would say it deserves to be 3.1 at least! :-) Regards, Jeremy Henty

Nov. 17, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi Jeremy, On Mon, Nov 17, 2014 at 05:33:41PM +0000, Jeremy Henty wrote: > > eocene wrote: > > > [...] I'll take out fl_oldfocus, and hopefully someone will figure > > out something at some point... > > Should we release 3.0.5 to fix this for distro users? Otherwise their > dillo will break when their distro updates to a FLTK-1.3.3 *.so . IMHO current repo is not as stable as it should for a new release. I'd pack a 3.0.4.1 with the fix for FLTK-1.3.3. The repo has more than enough for a version bump when its moment comes! -- Cheers Jorge.-

Nov. 17, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by onepoint＠starurchin.org

eocene wrote: > [...] I'll take out fl_oldfocus, and hopefully someone will figure > out something at some point... Should we release 3.0.5 to fix this for distro users? Otherwise their dillo will break when their distro updates to a FLTK-1.3.3 *.so . Regards, Jeremy Henty

Nov. 17, 2014

what's currently broken in dillo

by jcid＠dillo.org

Hi, On Sun, Nov 16, 2014 at 05:17:06AM +0000, eocene wrote: > Jeremy wrote: > > The Dillo source does something a little devious. It refers to > > fl_oldfocus, but this symbol is not declared in any header, it is just > > shared between two *.c files via an extern declaration (with a comment > > that this is a hack to make Fl_Group work). Something has changed in > > libfltk.so to stop the linker finding this symbol. I don't know what > > (I am not experienced in debugging linking failures.) > > To the best of my recollection, something tricky was necessary because > Fl_Group didn't have the idea that the group itself could have focus > instead of one of the children. I can't immediately see how to get it > to work right without fl_oldfocus, but if we can't link, we have nothing, > so I'll take out fl_oldfocus, and hopefully someone will figure out > something at some point... Good try, wandering focus got so annoying that I had to start scratching the itch! ;) FYI, I'm testing a patch that so far behaves OK. -- Cheers Jorge.-

Nov. 17, 2014