Hello John,
thank you for your reply.
I'm not sure I really understood the widgetlock, but I think the following
lines seem to do what I want - (Am I right?):
+ # If canvas was locked
+ if not self.canvas.widgetlock.available(self):
+ return True
I attached once more my patch including these new lines.
best regards,
Matthias
On Tuesday 26 June 2007 16:35, John Hunter wrote:
> On 6/26/07, Matthias Michler <Mat...@gm...> wrote:
> > Hello everybody,
> >
> > first of all: Sorry for posting to my own thread.
> > But I really like this new feature and may be the last message got lost
> > among the lots of mpl-mails. So I ask you once more for comments on this
> > issue (please).
> >
> > Is this new feature a bug to some of the RectangleSelector-users or a
> > real feature?
> > Could it be part of mpl?
>
> Thanks for reminding us on this one. Making these widgets work well
> together can be a pain. I wrote some locking functionality to help
> coordinate them, is any of this functionality useful to you?
>
> The patch looks mostly correct, but the code trying to get the toolbar
> state is problematic
>
> + # If zoom mode was activated
> + if not (Gcf.get_active().toolbar.mode == ''):
> + return True
> +
>
> Gcf is a pylab construct, and code in widgets must not be dependent on
> pylab. Also, using the mode string here looks a bit hackish since it
> is designed to communicate to the user rather than represent state.
> See if you can use the lock functionality to achieve the same purpose
> -- eg look at how widgetlock is used in the toolbar in backend_bases.
> If this is not viable, let me know why and we'll figure a better way
> for these widgets to communicate.
>
> JDH
|
