Wimp_SetExtent (&400D7)
Everymans Wine
Do windows using Wimp_SetExtent _have_ to be redrawn by the task as
I can't get mine to work?
Thanks,
Peter.
http://www.everymans.com/acornoffice/
--
____ _ _ _
/ __/ _____ ______ ____ _ ___ ____ ___ | | /| / (_)__ ___
/ _/| |/ / -_) __/ // / ' \/ _ `/ _ \(_-< | |/ |/ / / _ \/ -_)
/___/|___/\__/_/ \_, /_/_/_/\_,_/_//_/___/ |__/|__/_/_//_/\__/
EVERYMANS WINE, /___/ http://www.everymans.com/
100 Frankwell, in...@everymans.com
Shrewsbury, Tel:(01743) 36 24 66 Fax:(01743) 231 248
Stewart Brodie
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Do windows using Wimp_SetExtent _have_ to be redrawn by the task as I can't
> get mine to work?
Wimp_SetExtent has nothing to do with window redrawing. The only issues that
I am aware of with Wimp_SetExtent is that the extent you set must encompass
the currently visible work area of the window.
If you want to extend the extent of a window and then make it visible, you
need to call Wimp_OpenWindow with the new visible area co-ordinates. Then
the normal auto-redraw/RedrawWindowRequest stuff will be triggered to bring
the newly visible area up to date automatically.
--
Stewart Brodie
Acorn Computers Ltd
Acorn House, 645 Newmarket Road
Cambridge, CB5 8PB, United Kingdom WWW: http://www.acorn.com/
Phil Norman
> Dear All,
> Do windows using Wimp_SetExtent _have_ to be redrawn by the task as
> I can't get mine to work?
>
[snip enormous signature]
No. Things to check:
1: you're passing the window handle and new extent in r0-r4, not in a
block pointed to by r1.
2: your ymax is zero and ymin is negative.
3: you may have to reopen the window after resizing it for the changes to
take effect (the Wimp is a little dodgy in this kind of area; I'm not sure
if it is in this particular case).
Good luck,
Phil
--
Rule of programming #1: Everything that can go wrong will go wrong,
except when you're running the debugger.
Phil Norman, mailing from Oregan Networks.
email: for...@eh.org
URL: http://newton.ex.ac.uk/general/ug/norman
Graham Borland
Phil Norman <URL:mailto:ph...@oregan.net> wrote:
[snip]
> No. Things to check:
[snip]
> 2: your ymax is zero and ymin is negative.
Why is this? I've been creating and using windows with (0, 0) at the bottom
left for ages, without any problems.
Is the top left origin just convention? I could never figure out why
everyone does it this way, as I find it makes redrawing more confusing!
Graham
--
Graham Borland Email : gbor...@apsoft.co.uk
WWW : http://www.apsoft.co.uk
Alternative Publishing Ltd Tel : 0141 418 0881
30 Clyde Place, Glasgow G5 8AQ Fax : 0141 418 0889
Phil Norman
> In article <Pine.LNX.3.95.980803...@chaos.oregan.net>,
> Phil Norman <URL:mailto:ph...@oregan.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> > No. Things to check:
> [snip]
> > 2: your ymax is zero and ymin is negative.
>
> Why is this? I've been creating and using windows with (0, 0) at the bottom
> left for ages, without any problems.
>
> Is the top left origin just convention? I could never figure out why
> everyone does it this way, as I find it makes redrawing more confusing!
It does actually make a lot of sense. If you change the extent of a
window using Wimp_SetExtent, you'd expect the window's bottom-right corner
to change its limits, and you wouldn't expect the title bar to move.
So the top-left corner is the only fixed point of the window which will
remain fixed after a window extend change.
I'm not sure exactly what happens if you have a window whose origin is at
the bottom-left and you have icons whose y bounds are positive, and then
you change the window's extent. Do the icons move so they remain in the
same position relative to the bottom-left corner? If anyone knows this
I'd be interested in finding out what does happen in practice.
Phil
--
Rule of programming #4: The length of time taken to find a bug is
directly proportional to its simplicity.
Everymans Wine
<sbr...@acorn.com> wrote:
:) I am aware of with Wimp_SetExtent is that the extent you set must
:) encompass
:) the currently visible work area of the window.
So hang on a mo... I can't make a window any _bigger_ than it already is,
only smaller. In that case I would have to delete the window and recreate it
with a larger work area if I wanted a bigger one.
To make it clear:
-My window has a vertical scroll bar.
-When it is first opened the widow is set to a length and the inner part of
the vertical scroll bar is at full length (i.e. you can't scroll)
-If someone drags an app to the window the _area_ of the window should be
increased but the window doesn't get any bigger on screen, the scroll bar is
just redrawn to show that you can now scroll to another part of the window.
This is utillised to great effect in VTi's Voyager email and newsreader apps
but I can't get it to work. Is it possible?
Thanks for your help so far, sorry for this huge posting, but it's hard to
explain in words.
Peter.
P.S. My sig's not _that_ big is it? ;)
Stewart Brodie
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <486FE03048%sbr...@acorn.com>, Stewart Brodie
> <sbr...@acorn.com> wrote:
> :) I am aware of with Wimp_SetExtent is that the extent you set must
> :) encompass
> :) the currently visible work area of the window.
>
> So hang on a mo... I can't make a window any _bigger_ than it already is,
> only smaller. In that case I would have to delete the window and recreate
> it with a larger work area if I wanted a bigger one.
No, the other way around. If you want to make it smaller so that the
currently visible work area does not lie within the window extent, then you
have to re-open the window at an appropriate smallness or close then re-open
it etc.
If you are making the window bigger, then there is no problem.
I forget if you mentioned this before, but if you do have access to the PRMs,
then you should re-read page 3-164 and 3-165 (and possible pages 3-10 to 3-14
which describe the layout of windows).
> To make it clear:
>
> -My window has a vertical scroll bar.
> -When it is first opened the widow is set to a length and the inner part of
> the vertical scroll bar is at full length (i.e. you can't scroll)
> -If someone drags an app to the window the _area_ of the window should be
> increased but the window doesn't get any bigger on screen, the scroll bar
> is just redrawn to show that you can now scroll to another part of the
> window. This is utillised to great effect in VTi's Voyager email and
> newsreader apps but I can't get it to work. Is it possible?
Yes - it's the simplest form of extent changing there is. If you take the
top-left hand corner of the document as (0,0) (which is the commonest thing
to do under RISC OS)with negative Y co-ordinates going down the screen and
positive X co-ordinates running to the right, then you need to decrease the
minimum Y.
BASIC code to increase the vertical size of such a window by 40 units:
DIM winfo_block% 92
!winfo_block% = window_handle%
SYS "Wimp_GetWindowInfo", ,winfo_block% + 1
winfo_block%!48= (winfo_block%!48) - 40
SYS "Wimp_SetExtent",window_handle%,winfo_block%+44
Hmm. maybe I should have used something more readable. Anyway, that's it.
(speaking personally)
Spider plant breeding programme
> Why is this? I've been creating and using windows with (0, 0) at the bottom
> left for ages, without any problems.
>
> Is the top left origin just convention? I could never figure out why
Yes
> everyone does it this way, as I find it makes redrawing more confusing!
Brains and scrollbars I think.
It makes the scroll offset calculation easier to write down, IIRC.
Nick
--
#!perl -wlpi[finger.liv.ac.uk] # Black olives http://www.flirble.org/nick/
BEGIN{$_="use SocketYIN;sockeXPZSOCK_STREAM,~proto'tcp'and\$|=connecXpack'S
na4x8',AZ79,\$;=~host qq$^Ior die\$!;print'/w nickc\r'YOUT;print\$^I";s;X;t
STDIN,;g;s\Y\;select STD\g;s$Z$F_INET,$g;s{~(\w*)}}get$1byname}g;eval||die}
ct
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>So hang on a mo... I can't make a window any _bigger_ than it already is,
I think you misinterpreted him - you can't SetExtent a window smaller than
it visibly is. (Actually, as I recall, you can - but calling OpenWindow
directly after to resize it would be sensible, otherwise you get odd
effects.)
>-My window has a vertical scroll bar.
>-When it is first opened the widow is set to a length and the inner part of
>the vertical scroll bar is at full length (i.e. you can't scroll)
>-If someone drags an app to the window the _area_ of the window should be
This is exactly what SetExtent is for, and shouldn't be a problem at all -
call GetWindowState (? I may mean GWInfo), read the four extents out,
subtract (say) 32 from y-min, call SetExtent with these values, and then
call OpenWindow to get things updated. All IMFMSMW, of course.
>P.S. My sig's not _that_ big is it? ;)
Well, let's see:
>--
1> ____ _ _ _
2> / __/ _____ ______ ____ _ ___ ____ ___ | | /| / (_)__ ___
3> / _/| |/ / -_) __/ // / ' \/ _ `/ _ \(_-< | |/ |/ / / _ \/ -_)
4>/___/|___/\__/_/ \_, /_/_/_/\_,_/_//_/___/ |__/|__/_/_//_/\__/
5>EVERYMANS WINE, /___/ http://www.everymans.com/
6>100 Frankwell, in...@everymans.com
7>
8>Shrewsbury, Tel:(01743) 36 24 66 Fax:(01743) 231 248
9>
10>
11>
12>
13>
14>
nd the recommended /maximum/ is four lines. You're maybe just a smidgeon
over with that thing.
regards, ct
Everymans Wine
I managed to get it to work. For those who are intrested here's a
bit of the code (note: it won't work on its own, you need to build it into
your own prog.) This proc will set the VERTICAL extent of the window and
then redraw it (opening it if it's open, leaving it closed if it's not). It
could be increased to change the width aswell but I not using that in my
proggy.
window% is the name of your window to be resized
block% is the area of memory
:
DEF PROCresizestrip(height%)
LOCAL flags%,op%:!block%=window%
SYS"Wimp_GetWindowState",,block%
block%!12=block%!4:block%!8=block%!16-height%:REM Minus height% from window
block%!20=0:block%!24=0:REM Scroll offsets to 0
flags%=block%!32:op%=(flags%>>16) AND 1
IF op%=0 block%!28=-3
SYS"Wimp_OpenWindow",,block%
!block%=0:block%!4=-height%:block%!12=0
SYS"Wimp_SetExtent",window%,block%
IF op%=0 THEN
block%!0=window%
SYS"Wimp_CloseWindow",,block%
ENDIF
ENDPROC
:
Peter.
--
____ _ _ _
/ __/ _____ ______ ____ _ ___ ____ ___ | | /| / (_)__ ___
/ _/| |/ / -_) __/ // / ' \/ _ `/ _ \(_-< | |/ |/ / / _ \/ -_)
/___/|___/\__/_/ \_, /_/_/_/\_,_/_//_/___/ |__/|__/_/_//_/\__/
EVERYMANS WINE, /___/ http://www.everymans.com/
100 Frankwell, in...@everymans.com
Everymans Wine
:) >P.S. My sig's not _that_ big is it? ;)
:)
:) Well, let's see:
[Cut Long Sig] (Opps)
:)
:) and the recommended /maximum/ is four lines. You're maybe just a smidgeon
:) over with that thing.
:)
:) regards, ct
Well maybe; Voyager's Posty tells me it's 'Way too long!'
Dickon Hood
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <6q74l2$c2$1...@stu012.sjc.ox.ac.uk>, c...@comlab.ox.ac.uk (ct) wrote:
: :) >P.S. My sig's not _that_ big is it? ;)
[snip]
: Well maybe; Voyager's Posty tells me it's 'Way too long!'
So why don't you chop the bloody thing?
--
Dickon Hood
I've now managed to find my .signature file, normal service
will be resumed when Connex South Central get their act together.
We apologise for the inconvenience in the mean time.
Everymans Wine
<dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
:) : Well maybe; Voyager's Posty tells me it's 'Way too long!'
:)
:) So why don't you chop the bloody thing?
It's called marketing ;)
Peter.
http://www.everymans.com/acornoffice/ Comments & ideas welcomed.
Dickon Hood
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <5e12917048%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
: <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
: : : Well maybe; Voyager's Posty tells me it's 'Way too long!'
: : So why don't you chop the bloody thing?
: It's called marketing ;)
Seven lines is too long.
Ian Molton
> Seven? I make it nine (not that it's really worth dwelling on,
> though).
I make it seven, although it strikes me you're not one to talk - I've
quoted YOUR signature... :-)
(which is only 80 ish characters (1 line) shorter than his, or a whole 204
chars LONGER than my own...)
And I thought MY sig was long....
> b.
> -- "Reform is a process, not an event." -- Kofi Annan, UN
> Secretary-General
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: 2.6.3ia
> Charset: noconv
> iQCVAwUBNcjT40THjBg7TqfBAQH/kwP/cXJzigXDOBXSBRf2sr48+ingf7YteLhY
> SQNjp8dbr5XGsy+cJ7KH2CN/hhTgSsDvyTYVrlMbxeN5L3vyDAijqznYB/Vg8sGw
> yK9lds+B8g7kHa3zdNbvmj8301+IpjjWTqRJ1Af2nTniBgb6sLFOUwKW5E8yv0c2
> PAvmDrHuSfE=
> =+7iG
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
-Ian aka Lennier
Acorn Computers, the best in the world
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/
BaBe - Womens human rights organisation in Croatia
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/babe/
Dickon Hood
bas <b...@elfin.x-file.org> wrote:
: In message <f599fd7048%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>
: Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
: ...
: > : It's called marketing ;)
: > Seven lines is too long.
: Seven? I make it nine (not that it's really worth dwelling on,
: though).
I don't count blanks. My point probably should have been that is he *sure*
he wants to be known as someone who breaks Usenet guidelines, and does he
*really* think that's going to help his business?
Barry Wickett
<URL:mailto:ni...@liv.ac.uk> wrote:
> Graham Borland <gbor...@apsoft.co.uk> writes:
>
> > Why is this? I've been creating and using windows with (0, 0) at the bottom
> > left for ages, without any problems.
> >
> > Is the top left origin just convention? I could never figure out why
>
> Yes
>
> > everyone does it this way, as I find it makes redrawing more confusing!
>
> Brains and scrollbars I think.
> It makes the scroll offset calculation easier to write down, IIRC.
>
conventional in most OSes to have 0,0 to be the top left.
It is far more natural for document editing and the like. In the West we
naturally start from the top left and work to the right and down.
My old Dragon 32 computer had its co-ordinates arranged this way I seem
to remember!
Barry
Paul L. Allen
Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> writes:
> In message <589c7148%b...@cybernexus.demon.co.uk>
> bas <b...@elfin.x-file.org> wrote:
>
> : Seven? I make it nine (not that it's really worth dwelling on,
> : though).
>
> I don't count blanks. My point probably should have been that is he *sure*
> he wants to be known as someone who breaks Usenet guidelines, and does he
> *really* think that's going to help his business?
Dunno. Depends how effective the thinks his advertising on Usenet is when
his name is in my killfile and I don't see his posts.
--Paul
Ian Molton
bas <b...@elfin.x-file.org> wrote:
> ...
> > > Seven? I make it nine (not that it's really worth dwelling on,
> > > though).
> Oh, good. I'm glad we're in agreement about that.
:-)
> > although it strikes me you're not one to talk - I've
> > quoted YOUR signature... :-)
> How curious of you. This is obviously an idiographic peculiarity of
> yours of which I was previously unaware. FWIW, Messenger doesn't
> even display PGP signatures.
Well, !Pluto displays it, and it's shown in the colour designated for
signatures. It looks like a signature to me...
> > (which is only 80 ish characters (1 line) shorter than his, or a
> > whole 204 chars LONGER than my own...)
> I think you've miscalculated things somewhat strangely, then. I count
> that particular .signature (Zap randomly picks one from a file for
> me) as being 75 bytes in length, which is, as I understand it,
> a quite reasonable length.
> A worrying thought occurs to me -- perhaps you are considering my
> PGP signature to be a part of my .signature..?
Indeed I do. It's not a header, it's not the body of the article, therefore
I consider it part of the signature.
> I think this was discussed some while ago, when a number of
> individuals, in comp.sys.acorn.misc, I believe, were opposed to Jon
> Ribbens PGP-signing his articles; needless to say, things got somewhat
> heated, and a vociferously unpleasant thread ensued.
What a shame. Now, why was it I dont read .misc anymore, I wonder?
> I'd rather not have to read all that again.
Nor I.
> If you, Ian, missed it the first time round, I'm sure you'll be able to
> find it in Deja News, though the name of the thread escapes me.
I'd rather not.
> FWIW, I do have justification for PGP-signing my articles, and I
> don't intend to stop this practice merely because Ian (erroneously)
> thinks it's part of my .signature.
I dont care how long your signature is. I fail to see why a newsgroup
posting such as this one needs PGP signing, though...
> > And I thought MY sig was long....
> Yes, it's five lines, rather than four.
No, zap tells me it's 215 characters. 4 x 80 character lines is 320
characters, So I'm well within the limits...
> And `Womens human rights' deserves at least one apostrophe, btw.
Indeed it does - thanks for pointing it out!
> [snip my .signature and PGP signature, the inclusion of which
> was utterly pointless, as it happens.]
So you say.
> b. [yawn.]
You didnt need to jump down my throat....
--
-Ian aka Lennier
Acorn Computers, the best in the world
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/
BaBe - Women's human rights organisation in Croatia
http://www.users.zetnet.co.uk/hawk/babe/
Preferences: Cats, Zap, Purple
Ben Shimmin
> he wants to be known as someone who breaks Usenet guidelines, and does he
> *really* think that's going to help his business?
I've always been rather dubious of people promoting their businesses
on USENET at all, to be honest. There's a fairly fine line between
massive .signatures and multi- and cross-posting advertisements, IMHO.
b.
Barry Wickett
> A worrying thought occurs to me -- perhaps you are considering my
> PGP signature to be a part of my .signature..?
Do you really think so? No that can't be it.
> I think this was discussed some while ago, when a number of individuals, in
> comp.sys.acorn.misc, I believe, were opposed to Jon Ribbens
> PGP-signing his articles; needless to say, things got somewhat
> heated, and a vociferously unpleasant thread ensued. I'd rather
> not have to read all that again.
No, particularly when most people would be against you as they were
against Jon in the original thread. Although it did get a little too
much in the end.
> If you, Ian, missed it the
> first time round, I'm sure you'll be able to find it in Deja News,
> though the name of the thread escapes me.
>
> FWIW, I do have justification for PGP-signing my articles, and I
> don't intend to stop this practice merely because Ian (erroneously)
> thinks it's part of my .signature.
Not erroneously at all. I don't really care if you PGP sign your emails
and newspostings or not. For most people however your PGP signed
part does form part of your signature whether technically it does or
not. It appears after you have finished saying your useful or
otherwise bit so is useless to 99% of people. To claim otherwise seems a
little daft.
Barry
Everymans Wine
Peter.
--
Everymans Wine, Tel: +44 (0) 1743 36 24 66
100 Frankwell, Shrewsbury, Fax: +44 (0) 1743 23 12 48
United Kingdom, SY3 8JS. WWW: http://www.everymans.com/
Dickon Hood
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: Is this any better?
Yup. No question.
Alisdair McDiarmid
In message <ant06180...@gromit.tquest.org.uk>
Barry Wickett <Ba...@tquest.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <d95b647148%b...@cybernexus.demon.co.uk>, bas
> <URL:mailto:b...@elfin.x-file.org> wrote:
>
> > A worrying thought occurs to me -- perhaps you are considering my
> > PGP signature to be a part of my .signature..?
>
> Do you really think so? No that can't be it.
Of course not. It's quite clear that a PGP signature is nothing
to do with a .sig file.
> > I think this was discussed some while ago, when a number of
> > individuals, in comp.sys.acorn.misc, I believe, were opposed
> > to Jon Ribbens PGP-signing his articles; needless to say,
> > things got somewhat heated, and a vociferously unpleasant
> > thread ensued. I'd rather not have to read all that again.
>
> No, particularly when most people would be against you as they
> were against Jon in the original thread.
ISTR (although correct me if I'm wrong) that Jon initially
argued a very good case for using PGP signatures in news
postings, until other people descended to throwing semi-random
insults.
> Although it did get a little too much in the end.
Isn't that always the case with c.s.a.*?
[snip]
> > FWIW, I do have justification for PGP-signing my articles,
> > and I don't intend to stop this practice merely because Ian
> > (erroneously) thinks it's part of my .signature.
>
> Not erroneously at all.
I disagree.
> I don't really care if you PGP sign your emails and
> newspostings or not. For most people however your PGP signed
> part does form part of your signature whether technically it
> does or not.
However much we like to tell ourselves otherwise, a .signature
has very little real purpose. A PGP signature enables me to
determine if the message *really was* written by bas@cybernexus
or not. The addition of a few extra lines of text - which are
invisible in a Real Newsreader anyway - is easily justified.
> It appears after you have finished saying your
> useful or otherwise bit so is useless to 99% of people.
I'd be willing to bet that more than 1% of c.s.a.* readers have
access to PGP facilities.
> To claim otherwise seems a little daft.
Well, slap my face and call me silly, then.
--
Alisdair McDiarmid \ <mailto:alis...@illusion.co.uk>
Illusion Software \ <http://www.illusion.co.uk/software/>
Illusion Web Design \ <http://www.illusion.co.uk/web/>
010000EF2F2064616E67657261206E616A6261722D616A6F0202FD000EF0A0E1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQB1AwUBNcrvzcI9N74S3HIZAQEstwL/fw7sbgy4uw2SMfQPMEOFyeVotF7J0N7+
DFKE5aDm5pDwFkibudUqmhQ1uDUjReruESM2oTYc4yGh7JgJon/lR0Y5WTqrsle/
K2ghHZN7k0tFrghtv9AxZ6RK6DsQeEWh
=+xpv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Paddy Spencer
Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> In message <na.9de8a44870....@argonet.co.uk>
> Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> : In article <5e12917048%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
> : <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> : : : Well maybe; Voyager's Posty tells me it's 'Way too long!'
> : : So why don't you chop the bloody thing?
> : It's called marketing ;)
> Seven lines is too long.
I can prove that (as far as you're concerned) 7 is not. The proof goes like
this:
1. 4 lines is ok.
2. Your sig is 5 lines, so you must think one extra is ok.
3. Therefore 5 lines is ok.
4. You think one extra is ok (see 2.) so 6 must be ok.
5. As is 7.
Can we stop arguing about sig lengths now please? Honestly it's one of the
most dull, irritating thread topics there is, and has almost nothing to do
with programming. If you want to talk about sigs, go to alt.fan.warlord
--
Paddy Spencer Senior Software Engineer
Work (Rot13): cnq...@cnenyynk.pb.hx http://www.parallax.co.uk/~paddys/
Home (Rot13): cnq...@netbarg.pb.hx http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/paddys/
Spider plant breeding programme
> However much we like to tell ourselves otherwise, a .signature
> has very little real purpose. A PGP signature enables me to
> determine if the message *really was* written by bas@cybernexus
> or not. The addition of a few extra lines of text - which are
> invisible in a Real Newsreader anyway - is easily justified.
Odd. I can see it in gnus. :-)
Alisdair McDiarmid
In message <ejur9ys...@uxe.liv.ac.uk>
Spider plant breeding programme <ni...@liv.ac.uk> wrote:
> Alisdair McDiarmid <alis...@illusion.co.uk> writes:
>
>
> > However much we like to tell ourselves otherwise, a .signature
> > has very little real purpose. A PGP signature enables me to
> > determine if the message *really was* written by bas@cybernexus
> > or not. The addition of a few extra lines of text - which are
> > invisible in a Real Newsreader anyway - is easily justified.
>
> Odd. I can see it in gnus. :-)
Bah. Okay, /some/ Real Newsreaders, if you choose to make them
invisible. :-)
--
Alisdair McDiarmid \ <mailto:alis...@illusion.co.uk>
Illusion Software \ <http://www.illusion.co.uk/software/>
Illusion Web Design \ <http://www.illusion.co.uk/web/>
010000EF736F2077696C6C20796F7520656D706C6F79206D653F0D000EF0A0E1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.3ia
Charset: noconv
iQB1AwUBNctNJsI9N74S3HIZAQEw9wL+IsCE2escX1NgY/KqhGSUQohbllBH7IFN
Occqh9JTDKGmWd24hHDPQ6aoH6+YL1p/P8xishGB427DvXRwWoMQWO/dBBkToPiv
oAFRUt++79pZe6cz7EBV+eFiwsN6TzCj
=pLus
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
dgs
Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Is this any better?
No. It looks dangerously serious and professional. It makes
it look like you are a major multi-national wine distributor,
who are far too busy for childish things like ASCII graphics[1],
and can probably find any wine, anywhere, within 24 hours, and
undercut Tesco while you're at it.
It's just *too* sensible.
Feel free to *e-mail* me details of your winelist.
[1] But have probably out-sourced your website to some random
company, and hence are totally Javascript-infested on that side :-)
Manchester Acorn User Group - http://www.cybernexus.demon.co.uk/maug/
RPC x86 Card Info Pages - http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/pccard/
"Swinton? When did we move to Swinton?" - Roy Heslop
dgs
Alisdair McDiarmid <alis...@illusion.co.uk> wrote:
...
> However much we like to tell ourselves otherwise, a .signature
> has very little real purpose. A PGP signature enables me to
> determine if the message *really was* written by bas@cybernexus
> or not.
A very good point. On the other hand, *sensible* signatures do
occasionally contain some useful contact information, and you
*have* had some false negatives with bas' PGP signatures :-)
...
> I'd be willing to bet that more than 1% of c.s.a.* readers have
> access to PGP facilities.
I'd estimate more like about 30% :-)
dgs
bas <b...@elfin.x-file.org> wrote:
...
> FWIW, I think the original complaint against Jon was that his
> articles didn't have a .sig separator, despite his having a
> .signature, in addition to a PGP signature. As you can probably
> tell, it was real, top-notch csa.misc stuff.
A supposed failing that is now rectified, as you know. Not that
it had ever caused me any great concern in the first place - I
am quite used to snipping all sorts of nonsense when replying
to news posts :-)
Everymans Wine
:) it look like you are a major multi-national wine distributor,
:) who are far too busy for childish things like ASCII graphics[1],
:) and can probably find any wine, anywhere, within 24 hours, and
:) undercut Tesco while you're at it.
Bit touchy today are we? ;)
Does anyone know where to get a taglines program from?
Cheers,
Rosemary Miskin
You've already got one, built into !Voyager!. Tick the 'add tagline' option
in Preferences->News, and put a file called,IIRC, Tags in !Voyager.User
Rosemary
Domine deus, rex coelestis, gratias agimus tibi//Lord God, King of Heaven, we give you thanks
--
Rosemary Miskin ZFC LI mis...@argonet.co.uk
Loughborough, UK http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/miskin
Uploaded to newnews.dial.pipex.com at 22:21 on 08/08/1998
narrowb...@gmail.com
> In message <na.264f8e4870....@argonet.co.uk>
> Everymans Wine <ever...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <486FE03048%sbr...@acorn.com>, Stewart Brodie
> > <sbr...@acorn.com> wrote:
> > :) I am aware of with Wimp_SetExtent is that the extent you set must
> > :) encompass
> > :) the currently visible work area of the window.
> > So hang on a mo... I can't make a window any _bigger_ than it already is,
> > it with a larger work area if I wanted a bigger one.
> No, the other way around. If you want to make it smaller so that the
> currently visible work area does not lie within the window extent, then you
> have to re-open the window at an appropriate smallness or close then re-open
> it etc.
> If you are making the window bigger, then there is no problem.
> I forget if you mentioned this before, but if you do have access to the PRMs,
> then you should re-read page 3-164 and 3-165 (and possible pages 3-10 to 3-14
> which describe the layout of windows).
> > To make it clear:
> > -My window has a vertical scroll bar.
> > -When it is first opened the widow is set to a length and the inner part of
> > the vertical scroll bar is at full length (i.e. you can't scroll)
> > -If someone drags an app to the window the _area_ of the window should be
> > is just redrawn to show that you can now scroll to another part of the
> > window. This is utillised to great effect in VTi's Voyager email and
> > newsreader apps but I can't get it to work. Is it possible?
> Yes - it's the simplest form of extent changing there is. If you take the
> top-left hand corner of the document as (0,0) (which is the commonest thing
> to do under RISC OS)with negative Y co-ordinates going down the screen and
> positive X co-ordinates running to the right, then you need to decrease the
> minimum Y.
> BASIC code to increase the vertical size of such a window by 40 units:
> DIM winfo_block% 92
> !winfo_block% = window_handle%
> SYS "Wimp_GetWindowInfo", ,winfo_block% + 1
> winfo_block%!48= (winfo_block%!48) - 40
> SYS "Wimp_SetExtent",window_handle%,winfo_block%+44
> Hmm. maybe I should have used something more readable. Anyway, that's it.
>
Have to say have just found this old discussion thread very interesting an informative.
Just goes to show how useful Google Groups can be when looking for examples!