Some Eclipse Foundation services are deprecated, or will be soon. Please ensure you've read this important communication.

Bug 480335

Summary:

[GTK3] Spinner created with SWT.READ_ONLY flag isn't updatable

Product:

[Eclipse Project] Platform

Reporter:

Snjezana Peco <snjezana.peco>

Component:

SWT

Assignee:

Platform-SWT-Inbox <platform-swt-inbox>

Status:

CLOSED INVALID

QA Contact:

Severity:

normal

Priority:

CC:

akurtakov, arunkumar.thondapu, ericwill, ipun, jan.public, lshanmug, nobody

Version:

4.5

Keywords:

triaged

Target Milestone:

---

Hardware:

OS:

Linux

Whiteboard:

Attachments:

Description	Flags
A snippet	none

Description Snjezana Peco

2015-10-21 14:13:44 EDT

The attached snippet shows the issue. It is the changed Snippet184.
It is possible to update a spinner value using the spinner's arrows on Windows and Linux GTK2. As to GTK3, it can't be updated.
See bug 428246 and https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBIDE-20977 for more detail.

Comment 1 Alexander Kurtakov

2015-10-22 08:52:44 EDT

There is no snippet attached.

Comment 2 Alexander Kurtakov

2015-10-22 09:24:24 EDT

There seems to be two meaning that people put into READ_ONLY.
1) No changes possible.
2) Text field not allowing direct input.

My opinion is that if one allows changes into a widget values it's not READ_ONLY.
It's clearly unspecified behavior what should happen in this case. Adding Arun/Lakshmi for discussion as GTK 3 port has the correct behavior in my eyes.

Comment 3 Snjezana Peco

2015-10-22 09:29:14 EDT

Created attachment 257440 [details]
A snippet

Comment 4 Snjezana Peco

2015-10-22 13:25:07 EDT

(In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #2)
> There seems to be two meaning that people put into READ_ONLY.
> 1) No changes possible.
> 2) Text field not allowing direct input.
> 
> My opinion is that if one allows changes into a widget values it's not
> READ_ONLY.
> It's clearly unspecified behavior what should happen in this case. Adding
> Arun/Lakshmi for discussion as GTK 3 port has the correct behavior in my
> eyes.

Agree, but in that case, there is a bug in all other ports (GTK2, Windows, Mac).

Comment 5 Ian Pun

2017-06-01 11:47:31 EDT

(In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #2)
> 
> My opinion is that if one allows changes into a widget values it's not
> READ_ONLY.

+1 to this. I think this is correct behavior in relation to what READ_ONLY means, and this technically isn't a bug. I suggest opening bugs for the other ports if it's still occurring in the latest integration builds of Eclipse. Will follow up in a week.

Comment 6 Eric Williams

2018-08-30 15:25:06 EDT

(In reply to Ian Pun from comment #5)
> (In reply to Alexander Kurtakov from comment #2)
> > 
> > My opinion is that if one allows changes into a widget values it's not
> > READ_ONLY.
> 
> +1 to this. I think this is correct behavior in relation to what READ_ONLY
> means, and this technically isn't a bug. I suggest opening bugs for the
> other ports if it's still occurring in the latest integration builds of
> Eclipse. Will follow up in a week.

A week has gone by, closing this now.