| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|---|
|
A reply in a thread with no usable In-Reply-To carries depth 0, because that is
how notmuch reports every message of such a thread. CardLayout read depth 0 as
"not nested", so those replies drew flush against their own thread with no
spine, while a nested thread's replies indented normally: the list showed two
different shapes for the same relationship, side by side.
A MESSAGE row is nested at least one level whatever depth it reports. Being a
child row IS the nesting; the depth only says how much further to go.
This is the third fault from the same root. The depth numbering was trusted to
mean structure when it only ever meant "how notmuch happened to thread this":
first it hid a flat thread's replies entirely, then it left the first message
unreachable, and now it drew the survivors without their indent.
|
|
Four faults from the first hand test, two of them behavioural.
An expander that opened onto nothing. setThreadMessages kept only nodes with
depth > 0, and notmuch_thread_get_toplevel_messages returns every message at
depth 0 when a thread carries no usable In-Reply-To, so a flat thread
contributed no children while its card still advertised the count. Measured in
the user's database: of 396 inbox threads three are flat, one of them nine
messages long, and every two-message thread of that kind was affected, which is
exactly why the fault looked like "the expander only works with more than one
reply". The rule is now position, not depth: every message except the first,
which is the root card itself. That is also the correct rule rather than a
workaround, since the row under the root is the second message however notmuch
chose to nest it.
The thread's first message was unreachable. Selecting a root card loaded the
whole thread, so the pane showed every message with only the last expanded, and
no row in the list offered the first one: the reply rows are messages two
onward. The root card now renders its own message, which is what the card
already claims to be. It keeps its thread id, unlike the message-row path, so
mark-read and the tag-change repaint still work; that is asserted, because
clearing it is the obvious way to write this and silently disables both. Before
the replies are loaded the model has no first message to name and the whole
thread stays the honest answer.
Dates ignored the locale. One hardcoded "yyyy-MM-dd hh:mm" produced a US-looking
format on an Italian desktop; QLocale::system() now formats it, and the width
reserved for the date comes from the same function so a longer locale cannot
clip.
The expander was a bare number on the card's own background. It is a pill now,
carrying "3 replies" (and "1 reply", singular), sized from the label actually
drawn and measured in both glyph states so it does not resize under the pointer
on click. Its fill is blended from Text toward Base rather than taken from
QPalette::Button, which is #2b2b2b against a Base of #2b2b2b on the user's
theme: byte identical, so the pill was invisible. A theme may make any two roles
equal; a blend is defined against the surface it sits on and cannot collide with
it. Checked by rendering both a dark and a light palette and looking.
|
|
Both found by rendering real cards to an image and looking at them, not by any
assertion. The suite was green through both.
The date lost the leading digit of its year on every UNREAD card. The layout
reserves the date's width from the font it is handed, which is the view's
regular font, while the delegate paints with the bold one the model supplies for
unread: 154px reserved against 170px needed. CardLayout now measures the date
bold whatever font it is given, so the reserved width cannot be narrower than
what is drawn. A few pixels are wasted on a read card, which is the cheap side of
the trade.
The accent bar was painted correctly and was invisible. Blending the account
colour 0.35 toward the palette's Base, as the plan specified, is a fraction OF
THE ACCOUNT COLOUR, so on a dark theme it produced (0.18, 0.22, 0.26) against a
Base of (0.169, 0.169, 0.169): the background. The blend is dropped entirely.
An account colour is already chosen to be a chip's fill carrying legible text,
so it is muted to begin with, and nothing is drawn on the bar that needs that
contrast. The spine keeps a blend, at 0.55, because it runs the full height of
every reply in an expansion and is a different problem from a 3px edge marker.
The bar is still faint at 3px on a dark theme, since the account colours are
chosen as chip fills. Whether kAccentWidth needs raising cannot be settled
without the user's own accounts, screen and theme; that is Task 10's open
question and it is left open.
|
|
Split from the delegate deliberately. A delegate needs a live painter and an
exposed view, which is what makes delegate tests fragile: viewport()->render()
returns a blank image in several ordinary situations, and a probe reporting no
ink is likelier broken than the code it tests. Every geometric claim about a
card is made here, where a test is a function call.
Three lines at a uniform height, so setUniformRowHeights(true) survives. Indent
caps at depth 4 with qMin rather than a branch, so depth 5 and depth 50 land in
the same place. The date is measured before the sender, so a long sender elides
instead of painting over it.
Two traps handled that a first pass gets wrong. QRect::right() is inclusive, so
the right edge is carried as an exclusive one and everything sized from it lands
where the padding constant says rather than a pixel short. And QFont::pointSizeF
returns -1 for a font set in pixels, which qt6ct does, so smallFont branches on
which unit the font actually carries instead of silently returning the card's
own size.
|
