Is the source for Windows Store (WinRT) UI controls publicly available? We would like to extend some of the controls and not have to start completely from scratch, like we can for SL and WPF. Googling and looking through SO doesn't turn up anything for Windows 8.
Thanks!
So unlike WPF, [WinRT-XAML] controls are written in C++/CX.
But, it sounds not so much like you want the source code as much as you want to derive from existing controls and extend or override their functionality. You know you can do this, right? It's easy enough and sounds like you will get the results you are asking in your question.
Something like this:
public class MonkeyTextBox : TextBox
{
public new string Text
{
get
{
return "Always Monkeys!";
}
set { /* do nothing */ }
}
}
This is my custom TextBox wherein I have replaced the base implementation of Text with my own. Granted, I hope your custom controls are better. Anyway, you can do this with almost every control, and you can add your own properties and events. Make sense?
Reference: http://blog.jerrynixon.com/2013/01/walkthrough-custom-control-in-xaml-isnt.html
But to answer your question: no, we have not released the source (yet). Hopefully, that will save you the time looking for it. Maybe someday we will - maybe.
Best of luck!
Related
So the situation is that I have a bluetooth class where I get some values, I want to display those values inside the UI, but for some reason I can't figure out how to do it. In swift I would do it with an observable object, but in Kotlin I couldnt really find something similar, or I could at least not get it to work. Is there an easy way to do this (setting UI from a class?) and is there something special I have to do inside the class?
I was quite dumbfounded by how difficult it is / how hard it is to find how to do it. I have things like and more
val textView = findViewById<TextView>(R.id.NewText)
textView.text = "Changed from class"
I also tried setting that inside
lifecycleScope.launch(Dispatchers.Main) {
}
and inside
runOnUiThread{}
both crashed!
I have tried doing somethings with binding and researched quite a bit and I just can't figure it out.
I saw some thing with something called kapt, but that is old I Believe?
Any help would be appreciated, thanks in advance.
I always wondered what's the best way of handling a cancel button in a more OO way. In the hurry I always end up putting the ugly checking of a boolean form property if the button was canceled of not.
The thing is that way makes the code dirty, having a lot of "cancel checks" between logic that matters.
I always get to something like this:
void doLogic()
{
checkIfIsCancelled();
callOtherFunction();
checkIfIsCancelled();
callAnotherFunction();
checkIfIsCancelled();
callAnotherFunction();
checkIfIsCancelled();
callAnotherFunction();
}
I hope I was clear enough. I just want a neater way to do this :)
A proper way to handle this is the strategy pattern, where you have a default strategy where you do the normal processing and you have a Cancelled strategy.
Canceling changes the strategy to the cancelledStrategy that does nothing but some cleanup. The next call will go to the cancelledStrategy.
In this way even the cleanup is pretty straight forward because you know exactly where in the flow it was cancelled.
Another possible solution (but very dependent on your situation) would be the state pattern, but if you only need it for canceling it creates a lot of overhead.
it would REALLY help to know what GUI kit you're using here. Just from this it's impossible to know if you're taking about a windows, linux or mac machine. Add to that I can't think of a single GUI that that would function in this manner.
Most GUI's operate with a 'callback' pattern Widgets(buttons, menus, listboxes etc) are created and your code attaches a 'callback', a piece code or object&method that is executed when an action is performed on a widget.
In java for example:
Button b = JButton("Push") ;
listener = new ActionListener()_ {
public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e) {
System.out.println("I was pushed!") ;
}
} ;
b.addActionListener(listener)
Arranges for the message "I was pushed!" to be printed when the button is pressed. Of course this thin examples omits all of the work you need to do to setup your window, populate this widget etc.
1st what comes to mind is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chain-of-responsibility_pattern but I'm not sure, it's good here.
You can use the command pattern alongwith a stack to implement multi level undo support.
I am working on an Eclipse RCP-based application, and we have decided that we do not want any of the menu items to display icons next to the text. The problem we are seeing is that the standard actions like Undo, Redo, Cut, Copy, Paste, and so on all display the default icons for the corresponding actions.
Is there any way to tell the action management infrastructure to ignore the icons? My brute force solution to this was to rebuild the SWT so that MenuItem.setImage() was a no-op, and then include our own copy of the SWT in the final product, but it seems like there should be a lighter-weight solution.
This turned out to be easier than I had hoped.
Create a subclass of org.eclipse.ui.application.ActionBarAdvisor. Override the method register like this:
protected void register(IAction action) {
super.register(action);
action.setImageDescriptor(null);
}
Then, create a subclass of org.eclipse.ui.application.WorkbenchWindowAdvisor that overrides createActionBarAdvisor:
public ActionBarAdvisor createActionBarAdvisor(IActionBarConfigurer configurer) {
return new MyActionBarAdvisor(configurer);
}
That's it. All actions will no longer have icons.
I believe you want to further examine going into the manifest and looking into
org.eclipse.ui.views and seeing if there is anything in there for removing icons
What is the reason for not including icons?
A lot of effort went into creating a standard interface, what would be the benefit of deviating from the standard? Do you think their omission increases usability?
Having said all that you could try contributing a fragment with some AspectJ around advice to intercept calls to setImage() and veto them.
You can do this by going to the extension tab in plugin.xml.add the extension org.eclipse.ui.menu (if not present).Right click create a new menu contribution.again right click and create a new menu.here u have the option to change the images with the ones saved in your icon folder in your class path
I am a bit surprised that while learning WPF/XAML/Silverlight almost all of the XAML/C# examples I have encountered have the "Click" events in the XAML and very few in the Window or Page constructor.
With all the emphasis these days on "non-intrusive Javascript", I would think that more developers would actually be structuring their XAML/code-behind like this:
XAML:
<Grid>
<Button x:Name="btnEdit"/>
</Grid>
Code behind:
public Window1()
{
InitializeComponent();
btnEdit.Content = "Edit";
btnEdit.Click += new RoutedEventHandler(btnEdit_Click);
}
private void btnEdit_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e)
{
btnEdit.Content = "This button was clicked.";
}
Any thoughts on why this would be a good or bad practice?
Most of the smaller WPF examples give just an impression what is possible without focusing on design issues or good style.
In real world applications XAML should only be used for declarative programming. For example, binding a command to a button or declaring a data binding. Karl Shifflett has some great articles about the MVVM pattern which separates the concerns of your WPF/Silverlight application very well.
Code behind is in my opinion just suitable for tiny applications. It tends to mix view, control and data.
If I remember correctly, I think that there is a partial class which implements the Init code above that is code gened by visual studio. I can’t speak for WPF, but it does this in ASP.Net 2.0, so I’m assuming that it does it the same here. It took me forever to get used to this.
I agree. I hate defining events in the markup.
I agree with your concern.
After much debate, we are following a similar pattern of non-intrusive, ultra-lean XAML and binding commands and data in code-behind.
If you add events in the XAML there is a contextual menu navigation to the event code. If you bind commands in XAML there is no equivalent. You can navigate from the command declaration in the XAML but not where it is assigned to the Command property on a control.
MVVM is bad practice.
You think that you separate Data and View. And what? Total mechanism with XAML binding, binding commands, translating it to methods and implementing INotifyPropertyChanged for what? For UTests (I made - I test conception he-he)? Right software need in only in user's test... It's your code separated in such way in which you sometimes do not understand where is what.
For what you use INotify? For what Microsoft ALL WPF controls and entities as whole in WPF wrote inherited from FrameworkElement with magic DependencyProperties?
Multiple binding is hard resource technique by the word (read authors of MVVM).
I wrote high complicated 3D CAE system without any Patterns less than year...
with classic organization of app with classes and code-behind.
https://skydrive.live.com/?cid=ea6ad1087e3103f0&sc=photos&id=EA6AD1087E3103F0!103&sff=1#cid=EA6AD1087E3103F0&id=EA6AD1087E3103F0!118&sc=photos
All the samples in MVVM are about Customers in Company...
I offer put the name MVVMCC pattern (Customer in Company)
Does Xcode support anything akin to Visual Studio style #region directives for arbitrary code folding?
No, you can only fold code on various defined scoping levels in Xcode.
You can use little tricks to make navigating via the function menu easier, though.
#pragma mark
Allows you to create a grouping where the label following mark will show up in the function menu. If the label is a hyphen, a separator is inserted into the function menu.
Also, the following labels in comments will show up in the function menu:
// MARK:
// TODO:
// FIXME:
// !!!:
// ???:
Obviously since #pragma mark is not really portable, if you're building a portable application and need it to work with a compiler that doesn't just ignore #pragma directives that it doesn't understand, the comment-style mark is a decent alternative.
I am going to hell for this but here goes:
At the top of a given file, put
#define FOLD 1
Wherever you want to fold something, wrap it in an if block like so:
if(FOLD) {
// your code to hide
// more code
}
That will let you fold it away out of sight.
That won't work in the place you want it most, that is, around groups of functions or methods.
It may be useful inside a long, linear method with no internal conditionals or loops, but such methods aren't common in general Mac OS X UI code, though if you're writing some big numeric or graphics-crunching code it could help group things.
And the if(fold) is entirely superfluous. Just use the braces inside a method or function and Xcode will fold them.
Try this way :
//region title1
{
//region Subtitl1
{
}
//region Subtitl2
{
}
}
It can do like that :
Without support for .Net style regions, being able to collapse all your functions at the same time is the next best thing.
command-option-shift-left arrow
to collapse all.
command-option-shift-right arrow
to expand all.
Xcode will remember the last state of collapsed functions.
A useful option in XCode 12 (maybe before), is an option in preferences "Code Folding Ribbon"
When you check it, the source code looks like this
When you hover the mouse over this ribbon, you get foldable regions based on brackets, like this
When you click the Ribbon, it folds the bracket region, like this
Its not as the regions in Visual Studio, where you can place them wherever you want, but they're good enough to tidy up your code files.
To answer your question...No. And It drives me nuts.
If you have the opportunity/ability you can use AppCode for this. I've been using it for a few years and it usually beats Xcode in many areas.
Also I specifically use AppCode because of these features:
Ability to use regions
Searching classes, text and usages is MUCH faster.
Refactoring is also faster.
Cleaner and more customizable UI.
Tabs are handled (in my opinion) much better than in Xcode.
FOLDING. You can actually change what levels of folding you want. Why Apple thought there should be no quick-key to fold extensions is beyond me. And fold ribbons? Really Apple? Yes they're pretty and all but most professionals use hotkeys for everything.
Better GIT integration.
Support for live updates in SwiftUI
If you use other Jetbrains IDE's like PyCharm or Android Studio the UI is exactly the same.
Some downsides of AppCode:
Some things that work in Xcode aren't supported
Visual #colorLiteral(). When using them they don't show a color picker.
No Storyboard support. Annoying to have to open up Xcode. If you write your UI in code this is a moot point.
Editing .plist files isn't as nice. Doable, but not nice.
Initial indexing can take a while.
Cost. But I would argue the time savings in just navigation will compensate for this.
Kind of a lot for a simple question but I think it's nice having alternatives.
Put your desired code inside brackets { }, and it will become a folding zone.
But you have to keep in mind that brackets also define variables scope, so this code should not have variables declarations which will be used outside these brackets.
One nice solution I just found:
Put your project into one big namespace.
Close and reopen this namespace for the individual sections of your source file:
namespace myproj { // members of class MyClassA
void MyClassA::dosomething()
{
}
void MyClassA::dosomethingelse()
{
}
} // members of class MyClassA
namespace myproj { // members of MyClassB
void MyClassB::dosomething()
{
}
void MyClassB::dosomethingelse()
{
}
} // members of MyClassB