Two or three legacy things
Posted: Sun Aug 18, 2024 8:01 pm
I'm cleanin' up again:
ONE
When using F1 or the menu to get context related help the .chm file will open the content but will NOT in every case select the topic from the topics tree (most-left tab in the help app). To make sure the contents tree is updated to the current topic you'd have to go to the left tab to display the tree and THEN/AFTER press F1 in code or use menu to get context help.
That's annoying.
TWO
Coding xml and dialogs should allow for different GUI styles. In SB, by now you have "Flat" and "Aero/Glass" - why hard coded instead of dynamically combineable at runtime ?
AND ONE MORE
Since SPIDER and PURE are about the only machines to provide true OS vs. WEB compatibility, a speed comparisons section would add accessibility to the SpiderBasic chm help. Compare imperation, GUI, some functional libs and 3D from pure PC to them common browsers chrome, Firefox and Opera. The results should be interesting ... now, why would we all users have to test this on our own ??
ONE
When using F1 or the menu to get context related help the .chm file will open the content but will NOT in every case select the topic from the topics tree (most-left tab in the help app). To make sure the contents tree is updated to the current topic you'd have to go to the left tab to display the tree and THEN/AFTER press F1 in code or use menu to get context help.
That's annoying.
TWO
Coding xml and dialogs should allow for different GUI styles. In SB, by now you have "Flat" and "Aero/Glass" - why hard coded instead of dynamically combineable at runtime ?
AND ONE MORE
Since SPIDER and PURE are about the only machines to provide true OS vs. WEB compatibility, a speed comparisons section would add accessibility to the SpiderBasic chm help. Compare imperation, GUI, some functional libs and 3D from pure PC to them common browsers chrome, Firefox and Opera. The results should be interesting ... now, why would we all users have to test this on our own ??