Dear Al,
As far as I can see there unfortunately doesn't seem to be any
good way to achieve that. A "geometry" string passed to the pro-
gram isn't interpreted by XForms. Nor are any settings, e.g.
from the .Xresources file, taken into account. And using a
geonetry atring argument or setting a position/size via an
X resource are the two ways to do it I'm familiar with. And
within XForms when calling fl_show_form() only sizes and
positions are used that have been set via fl_set_form_size(),
fl_set_form_position() or fl_set_form_geometry() - in case
a 'place' value has been passed to fl_show_form() that
asks for evaluation of position or size information.
Personally, I always have used that when there was a need
for placing a form at a certain position. On the other
hand it indeed could be useful to set a position or size
via e.g. a geometry string. Although there would be a few
things to be considered first:
a) Which form is set according to the geomeptry string option?
It probably would be the "main form" (per default the first
one to be dispayed unless a different one is set explicitely
via fl_set_app_mainform())/
b) To facilitate this XForms would have to check for a
'-geometry' option on the commmand line. Since this
wasn't done before there can be a number of pplications
evaluation '-geometry' themselves which thus might break
when XForms would evaluate '-geometry' and not leave it
to the application (I got one myself where this would
be the case since it checks both for a '-geometry' option
as well as checking the .Xresource file).
c) I guess the form would need to be shown with fl_show_form()
with the 'place' argument set to 'FL_PLACE_POSITION' and/or
'FL_PLACE_GEOMETRY' etc. for the geometry string option to
be used.
I'm not sure yet that this would be a reasonable change,
especially given that it might break existing applications.
Does anyone has an opinion concerning this?
Best regards, Jens
--
\ Jens Thoms Toerring ________
j...@toerring.de
\_______________________________
http://toerring.de