Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.acorn.programmer > #6657 > unrolled thread

Hiding and revealing part of a window

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.acorn.programmer

Contents

  Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-10 09:49 +0100
    Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Martin <News04@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2026-07-10 10:06 +0100
      Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-10 11:25 +0100
        Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2026-07-10 22:19 +0100
          Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-11 10:32 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2026-07-11 16:33 +0100
              Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-11 20:41 +0100
          Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2026-07-15 17:39 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2026-07-15 20:24 +0100
          Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-16 11:05 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Martin <News04@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2026-07-16 12:04 +0100
              Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-16 12:48 +0100
                Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Martin <News04@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2026-07-16 13:26 +0100
                Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> - 2026-07-16 14:26 +0100
                  Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-16 14:50 +0100
                  Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-18 17:27 +0100
                    Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Martin <News04@avisoft.f9.co.uk> - 2026-07-18 22:10 +0100
                      Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-19 09:20 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Jean-Michel <jmc.bruck@orange.fr> - 2026-07-16 17:45 +0200
              Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-16 16:58 +0100
    Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Kevin Wells <kev@kevsoft.co.uk> - 2026-07-10 16:37 +0100
      Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-10 20:08 +0100
        Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> - 2026-07-12 12:12 +0100
          Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-12 13:45 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> - 2026-07-12 23:19 +0100
        Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Kevin Wells <kev@kevsoft.co.uk> - 2026-07-12 21:03 +0100
          Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> - 2026-07-15 20:26 +0100
            Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Kevin Wells <kev@kevsoft.co.uk> - 2026-07-17 21:06 +0100
    Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window J Peachey <john@jpeachey.co.uk> - 2026-07-10 21:15 +0000
      Re: Hiding and revealing part of a window Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> - 2026-07-11 10:11 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#6660

In message <5cf61ef6a3bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
          Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

>Words of guidance would be appreciated - thanks.
>
>An application I'm writing has a secondary mode which for the most
>part I want hidden. When the special mode is enabled, the main window
>reveals the control panel for that mode.
>
>Don't mind if the reveal is to the side or below the main window.
>
>What is the easiest mechanism to achieve this?

Would the easiest option is to have 2 versions of the window, one with
the basic options and one with the full options, just close the one you
don't want amd open the other one in it's place?
>
>Otherwise, I may have to create another window for these controls but
>I'm not keen on that idea.
>
>
>Thanks.
>
>Bob.
>


-- 
Kev Wells
https://kevsoft.co.uk/  https://ko-fi.com/kevsoft
carpe cervisium
Feeling stupid I know I am.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6661

In article <8f5e44f65c.Kevin@Kevsoft>,

> Would the easiest option is to have 2 versions of the window, one
> with the basic options and one with the full options, just close
> the one you don't want amd open the other one in it's place?

That's a sneaky idea I do admit. The only issue I can see with that
is I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?

Thanks.

Bob.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6668

On 10 Jul 2026 as I do recall,
          Bob Latham  wrote:

> In article <8f5e44f65c.Kevin@Kevsoft>,
> 
> > Would the easiest option is to have 2 versions of the window, one
> > with the basic options and one with the full options, just close
> > the one you don't want amd open the other one in it's place?
> 
> That's a sneaky idea I do admit. The only issue I can see with that
> is I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?
> 
Have a 'current' window handle in a variable, and set its value to
either of the two versions according to which one you currently want
your application to be using?
(Or use an array(handle%, version%) and adjust the value of version%,
but that would probably be harder to edit in to your existing program
and more difficult to read thereafter....)

-- 
Harriet Bazley                     ==  Loyaulte me lie ==

A thing is not necessarily true because a man dies for it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6669

In article <14c133f75c.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>,
   Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
> On 10 Jul 2026 as I do recall,
>           Bob Latham  wrote:

> > In article <8f5e44f65c.Kevin@Kevsoft>,
> > 
> > > Would the easiest option is to have 2 versions of the window,
> > > one with the basic options and one with the full options, just
> > > close the one you don't want amd open the other one in it's
> > > place?
> > 
> > That's a sneaky idea I do admit. The only issue I can see with
> > that is I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?
> > 
> Have a 'current' window handle in a variable, and set its value to
> either of the two versions according to which one you currently
> want your application to be using? (Or use an array(handle%,
> version%) and adjust the value of version%, but that would probably
> be harder to edit in to your existing program and more difficult to
> read thereafter....)

So at the point of swap over, I close one window, open the other in
same position hopefully and change the current window handle, is that
about it?

Not sure how fixed and embedded the window handle is in my code, I'll
need to have a look. It is an excellent cheat, though maybe best done
towards the end of the project to prevent duplication of work on the
window.

Thanks.

Bob.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6671

On 12 Jul 2026 as I do recall,
          Bob Latham  wrote:

> In article <14c133f75c.harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk>,
>    Harriet Bazley <harriet@bazleyfamily.co.uk> wrote:
> > On 10 Jul 2026 as I do recall,
> >           Bob Latham  wrote:

[snip]

> > > I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?

> > Have a 'current' window handle in a variable, and set its value to
> > either of the two versions according to which one you currently
> > want your application to be using? (Or use an array(handle%,
> > version%) and adjust the value of version%, but that would probably
> > be harder to edit in to your existing program and more difficult to
> > read thereafter....)
> 
> So at the point of swap over, I close one window, open the other in
> same position hopefully and change the current window handle, is that
> about it?

Yes - and make sure that any sections of the window that are common to
both views have the same icon handles, etc.  (i.e. if you have code
triggered by a click on icon 3 in that window, make sure both versions
have that icon as icon 3 and that any extra sections in the 'other'
window use a different range of icon numbers!)

> 
> Not sure how fixed and embedded the window handle is in my code, I'll
> need to have a look. 

I think you said you were writing in assembler, so if it is a value
currently being hardwired into the finished code than that would be more
of a problem.  You would need to reserve an area of memory to store it
in and then poke the new value into that area when you want to change
windows. And always load the value of the window handle afresh from that
memory location before actually using it - the same as I had to do when
using the SlidingHeap module.


-- 
Harriet Bazley                     ==  Loyaulte me lie ==

We are not punished for our sins, but by them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6670

In message <5cf6579ccbbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
          Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

>In article <8f5e44f65c.Kevin@Kevsoft>,
>
>> Would the easiest option is to have 2 versions of the window, one
>> with the basic options and one with the full options, just close
>> the one you don't want amd open the other one in it's place?
>
>That's a sneaky idea I do admit. The only issue I can see with that
>is I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?
>
>Thanks.

You could have 3 window handles, one say called main%, main1% and main2.

main% would always point to the one in use.
>Bob.
>


-- 
Kev Wells
https://kevsoft.co.uk/  https://ko-fi.com/kevsoft
carpe cervisium
http://worldticketshop.cleafs.com/go?k=TWKNy827tFspChxaFRbKe-OqVi3uXIyc MotoGP

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6674

On 12 Jul, Kevin Wells wrote in message
    <cd6264f75c.Kevin@Kevsoft>:

> In message <5cf6579ccbbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
>           Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>
> > I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?
> 
> You could have 3 window handles, one say called main%, main1% and main2.
> 
> main% would always point to the one in use.

Wouldn't that be 2 window handles: main1% and main2%? The main% variable
would then be a copy of the value of whichever one was in use?

Use Wimp_SetExtent and have one window... it's a *lot* less messy and
confusing.

:-)

-- 
Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England

http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6683

In message <mpro.ti8e0100sqjvl0c0y.news@stevefryatt.org.uk>
          Steve Fryatt <news@stevefryatt.org.uk> wrote:

>On 12 Jul, Kevin Wells wrote in message
>    <cd6264f75c.Kevin@Kevsoft>:
>
>> In message <5cf6579ccbbob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
>>           Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> > I'd have two window handles wouldn't I?
>>
>> You could have 3 window handles, one say called main%, main1% and main2.
>>
>> main% would always point to the one in use.
>
>Wouldn't that be 2 window handles: main1% and main2%? The main% variable
>would then be a copy of the value of whichever one was in use?

Yes
>
>Use Wimp_SetExtent and have one window... it's a *lot* less messy and
>confusing.
>
>:-)
>


-- 
Kev Wells
https://kevsoft.co.uk/  https://ko-fi.com/kevsoft
carpe cervisium
So many beers so little time.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6662

In message <5cf61ef6a3bob@sick-of-spam.invalid>
          Bob Latham <bob@sick-of-spam.invalid> wrote:

> Words of guidance would be appreciated - thanks.

> An application I'm writing has a secondary mode which for the most
> part I want hidden. When the special mode is enabled, the main window
> reveals the control panel for that mode.

> Don't mind if the reveal is to the side or below the main window.

> What is the easiest mechanism to achieve this?

> Otherwise, I may have to create another window for these controls but
> I'm not keen on that idea.


> Thanks.

> Bob.

Hi,

How are you implementing your basic control, is it a pane or separate 
window.

I did wonder whether you could create your basic, and advanced controls as 
individual panes, which you could open and close as needed.

The other way I could see it being done is design a window the maximum 
size for all the controls - then resize it to hide the advanced  controls, 
then resize to reveal the other controls.

Final thought is have all the controls on screen with them greyed out - 
this might be the simplest option

John

-- 
                          _________________________________________
                       |   University of Glos. Blighting Longlevens.
                       |   mailto:john@jpeachey.co.uk
_______________________|   http://www.jpeachey.co.uk

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6664

In article <340763f65c.john@user.orpheusmail.co.uk>,
   J Peachey <john@jpeachey.co.uk> wrote:

> How are you implementing your basic control, is it a pane or
> separate window.

At the moment I only have 1 window actively involved. I've never
tried to use a pane. 

> I did wonder whether you could create your basic, and advanced
> controls as individual panes, which you could open and close as
> needed.

It sounds good but I can't imagine it. Can you hide a pane?

> The other way I could see it being done is design a window the
> maximum size for all the controls - then resize it to hide the
> advanced  controls, then resize to reveal the other controls.

> Final thought is have all the controls on screen with them greyed
> out - this might be the simplest option

Yes indeed, you may be right. :-)

Thanks.

Bob.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.acorn.programmer

csiph-web