[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

O_STATIC implies 'special' justification, is this really necessary?

From: Frank van Vugt
Subject: O_STATIC implies 'special' justification, is this really necessary?
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:42:49 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.8


In form/frm_driver.c:183 a define can be found for 
Justification_Allowed(field). This check also makes sure that a field is 
O_STATIC. It looks like this check is only used as a guard to 
Perform/Undo_Justification() calls in frm_driver.c

However, I'm wondering about the ratio behind this all. Is it really necessary 
to exclude dynamic fields from say right justification? I understand that 
there are some layout- and form-traversal-issues to pay attention to, but 
I've tried and disabled the check for O_STATIC and nothing obvious seems to 
be failing...

Am I overlooking something here?

FYI, I'm presenting data from a database to the user through a fixed-size form 
with fixed-size fields that are almost always 'too small'. Since I want the 
complete contents of the field data to be available to the user, I want the 
fieldbuffer to grow dynamically on a set_field_buffer() call and thus unset 
O_STATIC. Some if the info ideally should be aligned right, though.



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]