These are chat archives for AvaloniaUI/Avalonia

4th
May 2016
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 04:33
@jkoritzinsky i've been thinking about your validation PR and I think i'd like to merge it pretty soon to master, there's no point it sitting in a PR
there might be things i'd like changed but that's no different to 90% of perspex ;)
what do you say? also in recognition of your excellent work i can give you core access if you like?
Matthijs ter Woord
@mterwoord
May 04 2016 09:53
Hi all! Is there a list somewhere showing details of currently supported controls and their features?
danwalmsley
@danwalmsley
May 04 2016 10:11
@mterwoord hi, there isn't a list, but there is a control catalog app that shows all the controls and demos them
Matthijs ter Woord
@mterwoord
May 04 2016 10:53
browsed through the sources a bit and it seems to me there aren't too many controls yet...
how hard would it be to incorporate gstreamer into perspex? :)
ie, for playing movies
Denis Zaporozhets
@QuantumDeveloper
May 04 2016 12:19
@grokys hi. Any news?
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 15:13
@grokys I have exams coming up next week, so I don't have much time to finalize some of the changes that you requested that I agree with until after exams. If you're willing to grant me core access after we merge the PR that would be great!
@mterwoord That's something I was looking at doing when I have time (also adding support for USB webcams).
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 16:13
@QuantumDeveloper the latest is written above ^^
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 16:21
@mterwoord not yet - i'm still trying to decide if things like that should even be in the core perspex or extensions
core perspex is already massive, i'd rather componentize it even more than it currently is tbh
especially because after we hit 1.0 everything will be API frozen
@jkoritzinsky ok, what do you disagree with in the changes?
just so i could work on the things you agree with in your downtime if i have time
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 16:36
The only one I really disagree with is moving
Ignore that last message. I've got lecture starting so I'll respond after lecture.
Big Jake
@jakesays
May 04 2016 18:11
hey how's the skia backend coming along?
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 18:18
@grokys I'll go though the check list that you posted:
  1. I agree. My original design was to match the design of WPF, but if we want to do it differently we can make that change.
  2. I think Exceptions should use the same mechanism, but can be always enabled, regardless of if validation is enabled.
  3. We already agreed to have ValidationStatus on PerspexObject in our PMs when you last reviewed the PR.
  4. ObjectValidationStatus is only the size of one pointer (to the internal dictionary). It's the same size as if it were a class.
  5. This is a commit that I just forgot to push out it looks like. I have it on my end.
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 18:30
Actually, I did push out the commit for number 5. Take a look here: https://github.com/jkoritzinsky/Perspex/blob/Validation/src/Perspex.Controls/TextBox.cs#L238
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 18:36
Also, relating to your idea that you want to componentize Perspex more than it is: Having an assembly called Perspex.ControlLibrary that actually contains the controls, and having Perspex.Controls have the framework-level stuff. (i.e. Control,TemplatedControl,Templates -> Perspex.Controls. TextBox, ToggleButton -> Perspex.ControlLibrary). What do you think of that idea?
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 18:53
yeah, was thinking of something like that, but i'm not sure... perspex isn't much use without the basic controls
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 19:16
We'd still distribute all of it in the same package. Just would be a different assembly.
Big Jake
@jakesays
May 04 2016 19:23
whats the benefit of separating the controls from the framework?
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 19:49
i don't really see any benefit tbh, however separating more advanced controls from the framework might be advantageous
the main reason would be to avoid a huge area of frozen api post 1.0
@jkoritzinsky a different assembly wouldn't serve much i don't think - we were even talking about ILMerging the different assemblies for the final release
We already agreed to have ValidationStatus on PerspexObject in our PMs when you last reviewed the PR.
i can't find where we agreed to this. it doesn't sound right to me...
it'd be like putting Background on PerspexObject
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 20:05
Here's a screenshot of the conversation.
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 20:22
Ahaha ok
I'm going senile
Yeah I need to think some more... My mind is all over the place right now...
Big Jake
@jakesays
May 04 2016 20:47
@grokys i agree - especially if 1) they're platform agnostic and 2) will always be distributed with the framework. (except, like you say, more complex, esoteric controls)
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 21:31
@jkoritzinsky reading back on our conversation, when i wrote this:
thinking aloud still: what if the validation state was exposed by PerspexObject just by calling a say void ValidationStateChanged(PerspexProperty property, string message) message
that was me moving away from having the validation property on PerspexObject
thing is, there will be so many PerspexObjects out there, that just adding 1 pointer can add a large amount of memory overhead
so it's best to only add features that take up space in the class footprint where they're actually needed
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 21:39
i will have a poke about and see if i can think of a low-overhead way of doing it
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 21:39
Ok. We can move the ValidationStatus direct property out to Control how
It was before
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 21:45
i think it should be moved to TextBox/whatever other control needs validation
but there should be an easy way to hook it up
otherwise you're not gaining anything, as most PerspexObjects are Controls
unless you're aware of other places where validation is needed?
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 21:49
Also my computers battery just died so I'm really not going to be getting a
Steven Kirk
@grokys
May 04 2016 21:50
i'm not sure if what i'm saying is possible btw... but it'd be ideal
if it has to be somewhere lower-level then yeah i think i prefer it being in PerspexObject rather than Control
Jeremy Koritzinsky
@jkoritzinsky
May 04 2016 22:04
We could just redefine the pseudo class on each type of control.
Gutemberg Ribeiro
@galvesribeiro
May 04 2016 23:11
hey guys
anyone figured out a way to build Skia for ARM? I got the build working all the way to the point it call yasm but it breaks there...