david@ics.com (David B. Lewis) (06/28/90)
(sorry if this is a repost; the mail never made it back here.) Both of these work, almost certainly through the courtesy of a coincidence of implementation. Are they acceptable practice, and can we expect that they will continue to work: 1) having a child control'ed by multiple parents 2) having a parent control multiple children all of the same name and type; e.g. I want ten toggle buttons, so I control my toggle button 10 times and deal with differences through an XmNcreateCallback. Thanks.
nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley) (06/28/90)
> of implementation. Are they acceptable practice, and can we expect that > they will continue to work: > > 1) having a child control'ed by multiple parents > > 2) having a parent control multiple children all of the same name and type; I could be wrong, but my memory is that DEC touted this as one of the (few:-) advantages of UIL. -kee Alphalpha Software, Inc. | motif-request@alphalpha.com nazgul@alphalpha.com |----------------------------------- 617/646-7703 (voice/fax) | Proline BBS: 617/641-3722 I'm not sure which upsets me more; that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's. -------