On Fri, Nov 21, 2003 at 01:27:37PM -0600, Doug Quale wrote: > So, you need to check this with someone who really understands the > details to make sure I haven't gotten it all wrong. I see three > possibilities: 1) lobby the gtk+ treeview crew to add setter methods > to the gtkTreeDragDest and gtkTreeDragSource interfaces, 2) enhance > the pygtk GenericTreeModel to include support for those interfaces or > 3) handle the drag and drop details yourself.
There's also the alternative of PyGTK itself providing a setter that simply sets the [potentially private] row_drop_possible property in the TreeModel's dest_iface structure, as described in http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-app-devel-list/2002-June/msg00239.html -- perhaps something [ugly] like treemodel.set_row_drop_possible_func(my_func) would do the job. I don't consider that a terrible thing, even if we don't track GTK+ perfectly, since it's going to be a common requirement once people start using the TreeModel API and DnD extensively. Of course, inheritance would be nicer, but I don't how how hard it is to go this way. Johan have an idea? I've CC:ed Kris to see if he has an opinion on how to set/override TreeDragDest's row_drop_possible from a language binding, given that there is no explicit setter and no inheritance mechanism to do so (AFAICS). At any rate, I do think Michael should open a bug to make sure this issue isn't forgotten. Take care, -- Christian Robottom Reis | http://async.com.br/~kiko/ | [+55 16] 261 2331 _______________________________________________ pygtk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.daa.com.au/mailman/listinfo/pygtk Read the PyGTK FAQ: http://www.async.com.br/faq/pygtk/
