Mail Archives: cygwin/2002/09/08/17:27:05
> On Sun, 8 Sep 2002, Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> > > You're missing something ;-). Resizing the window is in fact easy;
> > > getting the "Back/Next/Finish/Cancel" buttons and the separator to
> > > cooperate is a collossal PITA. Windows property sheets, it is
> > > abundantly clear, were never intended to be resized dynamically or
> > > otherwise once all the pages had been added.
> > >
> > > So, as a wise man once said, "the impossible will take a little longer".
> >
> > But isn't that exactly what my suggestion will allow to avoid? If the
> > window size is pre-selected (in fact, with a command-line option, you may
> > even know it before any windows are created), dynamic resizing is not an
> > issue. The window will still be non-resizeable, but will have a different
> > (fixed) size depending on the option. This could possibly be accomplished
> > by having multiple property sheet definitions and choosing the correct one
> > at run-time (I'm not too up-to-date on windows programming, so please
> > correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> The current size of the property sheet pages follows a recommendation from
> Microsoft on how a setup wizard should look and feel. As such it should
> look and feel good on most desktops.
>
> As far as I remember the main purpose of resizable pages is to make the
> chooser resizable.
>
> Other than that I don't see a reason to have them.
Right. But we definitely need to do something to make the chooser page a bit
less user-hostile. My current thinking, if I can get it to work of course, is
to have that one page just be bigger, but not to have user-available resizing.
> And I haven't seen many
> programs implementing resizable dialogs/pages btw.
>
I've discovered there's a reason for that. ;-)
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
Brewer. Patriot.
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
- Raw text -