awesome/lib/wibox/layout/fixed.lua

457 lines
14 KiB
Lua
Raw Normal View History

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
--@DOC_wibox_layout_defaults_fixed_EXAMPLE@
-- @author Uli Schlachter
-- @copyright 2010 Uli Schlachter
-- @layoutmod wibox.layout.fixed
-- @supermodule wibox.widget.base
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
local unpack = unpack or table.unpack -- luacheck: globals unpack (compatibility with Lua 5.1)
local base = require("wibox.widget.base")
local table = table
local pairs = pairs
local gtable = require("gears.table")
local fixed = {}
-- Layout a fixed layout. Each widget gets just the space it asks for.
-- @param context The context in which we are drawn.
-- @param width The available width.
-- @param height The available height.
function fixed:layout(context, width, height)
local result = {}
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
local spacing = self._private.spacing or 0
local is_y = self._private.dir == "y"
local is_x = not is_y
local abspace = math.abs(spacing)
local spoffset = spacing < 0 and 0 or spacing
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
local widgets_nr = #self._private.widgets
local spacing_widget
local x, y = 0, 0
spacing_widget = spacing ~= 0 and self._private.spacing_widget or nil
for index, widget in pairs(self._private.widgets) do
local w, h, local_spacing = width - x, height - y, spacing
-- Some widget might be zero sized either because this is their
-- minimum space or just because they are really empty. In this case,
-- they must still be added to the layout. Otherwise, if their size
-- change and this layout is resizable, they are lost "forever" until
-- a full relayout is called on this fixed layout object.
local zero = false
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
if is_y then
if index ~= widgets_nr or not self._private.fill_space then
h = select(2, base.fit_widget(self, context, widget, w, h))
zero = h == 0
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
end
if y - spacing >= height then
-- pop the spacing widget added in previous iteration if used
if spacing_widget then
table.remove(result)
-- Avoid adding zero-sized widgets at an out-of-bound
-- position.
y = y - spacing
end
-- Never display "random" widgets as soon as a non-zero sized
-- one doesn't fit.
if not zero then
break
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
end
end
else
if index ~= widgets_nr or not self._private.fill_space then
w = select(1, base.fit_widget(self, context, widget, w, h))
zero = w == 0
end
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
if x - spacing >= width then
-- pop the spacing widget added in previous iteration if used
if spacing_widget then
table.remove(result)
-- Avoid adding zero-sized widgets at an out-of-bound
-- position.
x = x - spacing
end
-- Never display "random" widgets as soon as a non-zero sized
-- one doesn't fit.
if not zero then
break
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
end
end
end
if zero then
local_spacing = 0
end
-- Place widget, even if it has zero width/height. Otherwise
-- any layout change for zero-sized widget would become invisible.
table.insert(result, base.place_widget_at(widget, x, y, w, h))
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
x = is_x and x + w + local_spacing or x
y = is_y and y + h + local_spacing or y
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
-- Add the spacing widget (if needed)
if index < widgets_nr and spacing_widget then
table.insert(result, base.place_widget_at(
spacing_widget, is_x and (x - spoffset) or x, is_y and (y - spoffset) or y,
is_x and abspace or w, is_y and abspace or h
))
end
end
layout/fixed: Prevent overloading widgets with negative spacing For each widget, the layout function checks whether placing it would make the function exceed the allowed geometry. If not, the function places both the widget and a spacing widget. This check ignores the size of the spacing widget itself, this can cause overloading of widgets on top of each other. For example, the following scenario with these widgets: widgets: widget1 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget2 { width = 10, height = 10 } widget3 { width = 10, height = 10 } and a call to horizontal layout with the { width = 10, height = 10, spacing = -5 } parameters. The function would layout the widgets the following way: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget2: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } spacing: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } widget3: { x = 5, y = 0, width = 5, height = 10 } } This behaviour would be the same for any number of widgets for negative layout. This patch changes the layout function to check whether the current widget uses up the whole space. It also removes 'pos' variable. Its purpose isn't intuitive in the presence of x and y. This helps to understand where each widget is placed now that x, y don't hold the end location of the widget in the previous loop iteration. The result of the previous example becomes: { widget1: { x = 0, y = 0, width = 10, height = 10 } } While this might not be the wanted behaviour exactly, distinguishing between the scenario where 2 widgets are drawn and a scenario where 3 are drawn might complicate the layout function too much. This patch also adds unit testing that catches the described behaviour. Signed-off-by: Shay Agroskin <agrosshay@gmail.com>
2021-01-01 20:13:19 +01:00
return result
end
--- Add some widgets to the given layout.
--
-- @method add
-- @tparam widget ... Widgets that should be added (must at least be one).
-- @interface layout
function fixed:add(...)
-- No table.pack in Lua 5.1 :-(
local args = { n=select('#', ...), ... }
assert(args.n > 0, "need at least one widget to add")
for i=1, args.n do
local w = base.make_widget_from_value(args[i])
base.check_widget(w)
table.insert(self._private.widgets, w)
end
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
end
--- Remove a widget from the layout.
--
-- @method remove
-- @tparam number index The widget index to remove
-- @treturn boolean index If the operation is successful
-- @interface layout
function fixed:remove(index)
if not index or index < 1 or index > #self._private.widgets then return false end
table.remove(self._private.widgets, index)
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
return true
end
--- Remove one or more widgets from the layout.
--
-- The last parameter can be a boolean, forcing a recursive seach of the
-- widget(s) to remove.
-- @method remove_widgets
-- @tparam widget ... Widgets that should be removed (must at least be one)
-- @treturn boolean If the operation is successful
-- @interface layout
function fixed:remove_widgets(...)
local args = { ... }
local recursive = type(args[#args]) == "boolean" and args[#args]
local ret = true
for k, rem_widget in ipairs(args) do
if recursive and k == #args then break end
local idx, l = self:index(rem_widget, recursive)
if idx and l and l.remove then
l:remove(idx, false)
else
ret = false
end
end
return #args > (recursive and 1 or 0) and ret
end
function fixed:get_children()
return self._private.widgets
end
function fixed:set_children(children)
self:reset()
if #children > 0 then
self:add(unpack(children))
end
end
--- Replace the first instance of `widget` in the layout with `widget2`.
-- @method replace_widget
-- @tparam widget widget The widget to replace
-- @tparam widget widget2 The widget to replace `widget` with
-- @tparam[opt=false] boolean recursive Digg in all compatible layouts to find the widget.
-- @treturn boolean If the operation is successful
-- @interface layout
function fixed:replace_widget(widget, widget2, recursive)
local idx, l = self:index(widget, recursive)
if idx and l then
l:set(idx, widget2)
return true
end
return false
end
function fixed:swap(index1, index2)
if not index1 or not index2 or index1 > #self._private.widgets
or index2 > #self._private.widgets then
return false
end
local widget1, widget2 = self._private.widgets[index1], self._private.widgets[index2]
self:set(index1, widget2)
self:set(index2, widget1)
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
self:emit_signal("widget::swapped", widget1, widget2, index2, index1)
return true
end
function fixed:swap_widgets(widget1, widget2, recursive)
base.check_widget(widget1)
base.check_widget(widget2)
local idx1, l1 = self:index(widget1, recursive)
local idx2, l2 = self:index(widget2, recursive)
if idx1 and l1 and idx2 and l2 and (l1.set or l1.set_widget) and (l2.set or l2.set_widget) then
if l1.set then
l1:set(idx1, widget2)
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
if l1 == self then
self:emit_signal("widget::swapped", widget1, widget2, idx2, idx1)
end
elseif l1.set_widget then
l1:set_widget(widget2)
end
if l2.set then
l2:set(idx2, widget1)
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
if l2 == self then
self:emit_signal("widget::swapped", widget1, widget2, idx2, idx1)
end
elseif l2.set_widget then
l2:set_widget(widget1)
end
return true
end
return false
end
function fixed:set(index, widget2)
if (not widget2) or (not self._private.widgets[index]) then return false end
base.check_widget(widget2)
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
local w = self._private.widgets[index]
self._private.widgets[index] = widget2
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
self:emit_signal("widget::replaced", widget2, w, index)
return true
end
--- The widget used to fill the spacing between the layout elements.
--
-- By default, no widget is used.
--
--@DOC_wibox_layout_fixed_spacing_widget_EXAMPLE@
--
-- @property spacing_widget
-- @tparam widget spacing_widget
-- @propemits true false
-- @interface layout
function fixed:set_spacing_widget(wdg)
self._private.spacing_widget = base.make_widget_from_value(wdg)
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
self:emit_signal("property::spacing_widget", wdg)
end
--- Insert a new widget in the layout at position `index`.
--
-- @method insert
-- @tparam number index The position.
-- @tparam widget widget The widget.
-- @treturn boolean If the operation is successful.
-- @emits widget::inserted
-- @emitstparam widget::inserted widget self The fixed layout.
-- @emitstparam widget::inserted widget widget index The inserted widget.
-- @emitstparam widget::inserted number count The widget count.
-- @interface layout
function fixed:insert(index, widget)
if not index or index < 1 or index > #self._private.widgets + 1 then return false end
base.check_widget(widget)
table.insert(self._private.widgets, index, widget)
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
self:emit_signal("widget::inserted", widget, #self._private.widgets)
return true
end
-- Fit the fixed layout into the given space.
-- @param context The context in which we are fit.
-- @param orig_width The available width.
-- @param orig_height The available height.
function fixed:fit(context, orig_width, orig_height)
local width_left, height_left = orig_width, orig_height
local spacing = self._private.spacing or 0
local widgets_nr = #self._private.widgets
local is_y = self._private.dir == "y"
local used_max = 0
-- when no widgets exist the function can be called with orig_width or
-- orig_height equal to nil. Exit early in this case.
if widgets_nr == 0 then
return 0, 0
end
for k, v in pairs(self._private.widgets) do
local w, h = base.fit_widget(self, context, v, width_left, height_left)
local max
if is_y then
max = w
height_left = height_left - h
else
max = h
width_left = width_left - w
end
if max > used_max then
used_max = max
end
if k < widgets_nr then
if is_y then
height_left = height_left - spacing
else
width_left = width_left - spacing
end
end
if width_left <= 0 or height_left <= 0 then
-- this complicated two lines determine whether we're out-of-space
-- because of spacing, or if the last widget doesn't fit in
if is_y then
height_left = k < widgets_nr and height_left + spacing or height_left
height_left = height_left < 0 and 0 or height_left
else
width_left = k < widgets_nr and width_left + spacing or width_left
width_left = width_left < 0 and 0 or width_left
end
break
end
end
if is_y then
return used_max, orig_height - height_left
end
return orig_width - width_left, used_max
end
function fixed:reset()
self._private.widgets = {}
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
2016-08-08 08:39:43 +02:00
self:emit_signal("widget::reseted")
self:emit_signal("widget::reset")
end
--- Set the layout's fill_space property. If this property is true, the last
-- widget will get all the space that is left. If this is false, the last widget
-- won't be handled specially and there can be space left unused.
-- @property fill_space
-- @tparam boolean fill_space
-- @propemits true false
function fixed:fill_space(val)
if self._private.fill_space ~= val then
self._private.fill_space = not not val
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
self:emit_signal("property::fill_space", val)
end
end
local function get_layout(dir, widget1, ...)
local ret = base.make_widget(nil, nil, {enable_properties = true})
gtable.crush(ret, fixed, true)
ret._private.dir = dir
ret._private.widgets = {}
ret:set_spacing(0)
ret:fill_space(false)
if widget1 then
ret:add(widget1, ...)
end
return ret
end
--- Returns a new horizontal fixed layout. Each widget will get as much space as it
-- asks for and each widget will be drawn next to its neighboring widget.
-- Widgets can be added via :add() or as arguments to this function.
2017-02-22 04:03:21 +01:00
-- Note that widgets ignore `forced_height`. They will use the preferred/minimum width
-- on the horizontal axis, and a stretched height on the vertical axis.
-- @tparam widget ... Widgets that should be added to the layout.
-- @constructorfct wibox.layout.fixed.horizontal
function fixed.horizontal(...)
return get_layout("x", ...)
end
--- Returns a new vertical fixed layout. Each widget will get as much space as it
-- asks for and each widget will be drawn next to its neighboring widget.
-- Widgets can be added via :add() or as arguments to this function.
2017-02-22 04:03:21 +01:00
-- Note that widgets ignore `forced_width`. They will use the preferred/minimum height
-- on the vertical axis, and a stretched width on the horizontal axis.
-- @tparam widget ... Widgets that should be added to the layout.
-- @constructorfct wibox.layout.fixed.vertical
function fixed.vertical(...)
return get_layout("y", ...)
end
--- Add spacing between each layout widgets.
--
--@DOC_wibox_layout_fixed_spacing_EXAMPLE@
--
-- @property spacing
-- @tparam number spacing Spacing between widgets.
-- @propemits true false
-- @interface layout
function fixed:set_spacing(spacing)
if self._private.spacing ~= spacing then
self._private.spacing = spacing
self:emit_signal("widget::layout_changed")
self:emit_signal("property::spacing", spacing)
end
end
function fixed:get_spacing()
return self._private.spacing or 0
end
--@DOC_fixed_COMMON@
return fixed
-- vim: filetype=lua:expandtab:shiftwidth=4:tabstop=8:softtabstop=4:textwidth=80