Text edited by author on Oct 23, 2008 @ 7:37AM

---

; Place and manipulate a custom sidepanel/listbox on windows, via dcx.dll.

alias listbox {
  var %listbox.target, %listbox.win, %popup, %reset, $&
    %width 

  set -n %listbox.target $1
  if (%listbox.target == -reset) {
    set -n %listbox.target $2
    set -n %reset 1
  }
  if (!%listbox.target) && ($active) {
    set -n %listbox.target $ifmatch
  }

  if ($window(%listbox.target).type) && ($v1 == custom) {
    set -n %listbox.win $+(%listbox.target,.listbox)
  }
  elseif ($window(%listbox.target).type) && ($numtok($v1,32) == 1) {
    set -n %listbox.win $+(@,%listbox.target,.listbox)
  }
  else {
    set -n %listbox.win $+(@,$remove(%listbox.target,$chr(32)),.listbox)
  }

  if (%listbox.target) && (%listbox.win) {

    set -n %width $calc( 20 * $width(X,$qt($window(%listbox.target).font),$window(%listbox.target).fontsize) )

    if (%reset) {
      if ($window(%listbox.win)) {
        close %listbox.win
      }
    }

    if (!$window(%listbox.win)) {
      window -hl +dsL %listbox.win -1 -1 %width 100 
      e -s xdock -c $window(%listbox.win).hwnd +v $window(%listbox.target).hwnd
      xdock -c $window(%listbox.win).hwnd +v $window(%listbox.target).hwnd
      window %listbox.win 0 26 140 $calc($window(%listbox.target).dh -26)
      window -a %listbox.win
    }

  }

}

menu @*.listbox {

  $iif($window($active).w >= $calc(20* $width(X,$qt($window($remove($mid($active,2,$len($active)),.listbox)).font),$window($remove($mid($active,2,$len($active)),.listbox)).fontsize)),Hide,Show):/listbox.toggle
  .-
  Cancel:/noop
  .-
  Reset:/listbox -reset $remove($mid($active,2,$len($active)),.listbox)
  .-

}

alias listbox.toggle {
  var %listbox.win, %minimum, %parent
  set -n %listbox.win $1
  set -n %minimum 4
  if (!%listbox.win) && (*.listbox iswm $active) {
    set -n %listbox.win $active
  }
  if (!%listbox.win) {
    if ($window($active).type) && ($v1 == custom) {
      set -n %listbox.win $+($active,.listbox)
    }
    elseif ($window($active).type) && ($numtok($v1,32) == 1) {
      set -n %listbox.win $+(@,$active,.listbox)
    }
    else {
      set -n %listbox.win $+(@,$remove($active,$chr(32)),.listbox)
    }
  }
  if (%listbox.win) {

    set -n %parent $remove($mid(%listbox.win,2,$len(%listbox.win)),.listbox)

    if ($window(%listbox.win).w > %minimum) {
      xdock -r $window(%listbox.win).hwnd + %minimum 0
      window -h %listbox.win
    }
    else {
      set -n %width $calc( 20 * $width(X,$qt($window(%parent).font),$window(%parent).fontsize) )
      window -a %listbox.win 0 26 140 $calc($window(%parent).dh -26)
    }
  }
}

dialog listbox.toolbar {
  title "Listbox Toolbar"
  size -1 -1 1 1
  option pixels
  ; menu "File", 1000
}
ON *:DIALOG:listbox.toolbar:*:*: {

  if ( $devent == init ) {
    dcx Mark $dname dcx_event

    xdialog -b $dname +s
    .timer 1 0 xdock -c $dialog($dname).hwnd +h $window($active).hwnd

    ; rebar acting as top toolbar
    xdialog -c $dname 1 rebar 10 10 400 400 varheight nodivider dblclktoggle
    xdid -w $dname 1 + 113 $shell
    xdid -w $dname 1 + 112 $shell
    ;xdid -q $dname 1 1

    ; Toolbar in the rebar
    xdid -a $dname 1 -1 +c 0 23 220 0 $rgb(255,0,0) Toolbar $chr(9) 2 toolbar 0 0 0 0 list flat tooltips nodivider
    xdid -l $dname 2 16
    xdid -w $dname 2 +n 112 $shell
    xdid -w $dname 2 +d 113 $shell
    xdid -w $dname 2 +h 114 $shell
    xdid -a $dname 2 0 +ac 0 1 $rgb(255,0,0) Button 1 $chr(9) Tooltip
    xdid -a $dname 2 0 + 0 0 0 -
    xdid -a $dname 2 0 +ac 0 0 $rgb(0,0,255) Button 2 $chr(9) Tooltip
    xdid -a $dname 2 0 + 0 0 0 -
    xdid -a $dname 2 0 +ac 0 1 -1 $chr(9) Tooltip
    xdid -m $dname 2 1

    .timer 1 0 xdialog -l $dname update
  }
}

---

---

D_ERROR /xdock (Unable to find destination Window)

---

Text edited by author on Dec 29, 2007 @ 4:49PM

quote:

---

Foi_Mal said:

In toolbar, the command "/xdid -c [DNAME] [ID] [N] [+FLAGS] [COLOR]" (This command lets you change the Nth toolbar button ...), dont change the color if [N] = 1 (Dont color first button here), fix plis ;D

---

Text edited by author on May 31, 2007 @ 2:51PM

Text edited by author on Jun 1, 2007 @ 4:36AM

---

/xdid -t
This command lets you load the contents of a file directly in the richedit.
Syntax: 	
/xdid -t [DNAME] [ID] [FILENAME]
Example: 	
/xdid -t dcx 4 C:\mIRC\blah.txt

---

Text edited by author on Feb 24, 2007 @ 4:06AM

Text edited by author on Oct 11, 2006 @ 9:24AM

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

just cause it has cell layout algorithm doesn't make dcx better than mdx.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

a dll should be easy to use, dcx isn't .

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

As for saying mdx isn't as good, mdx has and always been more and sufficent for people styleing there dialogs in past.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

just cause dcx is a new dll, that doesn't change that mdx is still more and sufficent to style you're dialogs with.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

with dcx you have to learn how to code a new dialog style, with mdx you didn't. it attached on to mircs normal dialog coding. dcx doesn't. dlls should attach on to present features in mirc, not require you to learn a whole new coding style.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

i have nothing against clickhere or the dll. its good that it provides something differnet in mirc. As mirc scripting has needed something new for awhile. but it pisses me off that all of a sudden people are saying due to this release that mdx isn't good enough to style you're dialogs with. this release doesn't change that mdx is a great dll.

---

Text edited by author on May 14, 2006 @ 1:12PM

quote:

---

hixxy said:

In my opinion, it does. Ever tried resizing a dialog and having everything align nicely using MDX? It's a pain.

---

quote:

---

hixxy said:

Yes it is. I find dcx much easier to work with, because of the mIRCish aliases included with the dll. It also has better documentation than MDX. Your comment was totally subjective and shouldn't be used as a reason why MDX is better than DCX.

---

quote:

---

hixxy said:

Yeah, right. If I had a quid for every shortcoming I'd seen people complain about I'd be a rich man.

---

quote:

---

hixxy said:

The MDX way is terribly inefficient. It uses two controls for each control (the original mIRC control and the control MDX adds itself). This isn't a good idea.

Dlls don't require you to learn a whole new coding style either, everything is done through a mIRC command/identifer; /dll / $dll

---

quote:

---

hixxy said:

MDX is a great dll, just not great enough. It's inefficient, it doesn't have anywhere near as many features, it's not in development any longer, the documentation isn't great, etc. DCX is better in every way.

---

Text edited by author on May 14, 2006 @ 2:44PM

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

entitled to you're opinion but i've never had a prob with this before

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

Just cause you find it easy to work with, doesn't mean someone with less experience with mirc scripting will find it easy. My comment wasn't subjective, its a fact i believe which you obviouslly disagree with. The commands may be mircish aliases as you put it but you still have to learn them and the switches that go with them. With mdx, you have to do this as well but it attaches on to normal mirc dialog controls. new scripters or not so advanced scripter, will find this easier to learn than dcx, as there already familiar with these controls.

DCX is a good dll, theres a lot to it, you can do a lot with it. But it will take a good bit of time to learn dcx due to this, not everyone will have the time to put into learning it all. If this is the case for someone, then mdx is the better option. As theres not as much to it and is quick to pick up and learn.

As for documentation, there both good but there always going be a need for tutorials for anything released for mirc.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

Theres always going be comments about people having problems with any mirc dll, mirc addon or mirc script. it's part of mirc scripting, not everyone is capable of figureing things out and use sites like these, to post comments in hope to get an answer. To use this as a reason for dcx being better than mdx is false.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

so the xdialog and its switches and xdid and its switches are all normal mirc commands that people don't need to learn before using dcx then? the diffenrt controls and how you add them to a dialog with dcx doesn't need to be learned? how to actually make you're dialog functional by using xdid instead of did doesn't need to be learned?

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

just cause dcx provides more features doesn't make it better.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

Theres the learning the new coding for people to be taken into consideration to, with dcx it will take longer to learn due to this.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

as you will learn it quickly, it has been efficient to style dialogs and been used by many scriptors for years to do this.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

this is why i say mdx is better than dcx, it's a lot easier and quicker to learn mdx than dcx for any scriptor, whether they are a new or advanced scriptor.

---

Text edited by author on May 14, 2006 @ 3:01PM

Text edited by author on May 14, 2006 @ 8:58PM

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

as for the $calc argument, why use mdx to resize a dialog anyway, i've always used dialog -s if i recall correctlly. been awhile since i looked.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

they should accuratelly potray both .dlls for what they are. and thats, there both great .dlls

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

but if you dun have a lot of time to learn dcx, then mdx is the better option. due to it being simple and i fail to see how mdx was used by many scripters for many years but all of it sudden its sloopy and not good enough.

---

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

seems hixxy isn't open-minded enough to realise not everyone will agree with him and find dcx easier to use

---

Text edited by author on May 15, 2006 @ 4:08AM

quote:

---

shadowofthenight said:

anyway everyone will prefer whatever one of the dlls and will use the one they find easier to use. which for me and im sure a few others....is mdx, so i say thats better, you's obviouslly prefer dcx and find it easier to use.

---

---

ON *:DIALOG:testing:init:0: {
  echo -s $dcx( Mark, $dname dcx_event )
  xdialog -b $dname +tyzsmn
}
alias testing {  dialog -m testing testing }
dialog testing {
  title "DCX - Dialog Control Xtension Demo"
  size -1 -1 520 500
  option pixel
}

---

Text edited by author on May 12, 2006 @ 5:28PM

Text edited by author on Feb 3, 2006 @ 3:32PM

Text edited by author on Jan 25, 2006 @ 4:59AM

quote:

---

contr0l said:

Anyways, what about control sub-items? Like the progressbar inside a listview cell. are you gonna do that?

---

quote:

---

contr0l said:

What about SidePanels like Explorer's? With the expandable headers, custom images for (bg,headerbg, expand image etc...), and diff item types. (link, detail, image, etc...) go go go ;))

---

quote:

---

contr0l said:

Would it be possible to, after the dialog is open cache all of the control's ids and coords, so that you could add an Auto-Resize function. So a dialog could be made to be Resizable from one dll call, instead of lines and lines of MoveControl code. Not sure on how it would work, or even if it could, seeing as how the dll wouldnt know how you wanted it to resize, Maybe they could resize relevant to other controls or something, /me shrugs. A dialog Auto Resize function would just about take the cake!

---

Text edited by author on Jan 25, 2006 @ 6:18AM

Text edited by author on Jan 12, 2006 @ 6:33PM

Text edited by author on Dec 18, 2005 @ 2:50PM

Text edited by author on Jan 10, 2006 @ 8:37PM

Text edited by author on Dec 28, 2005 @ 9:01AM

Text edited by author on Dec 28, 2005 @ 11:07PM

Text edited by author on Dec 18, 2005 @ 8:00AM

Text edited by author on Dec 19, 2005 @ 7:04AM

quote:

---

ClickHeRe said:

This is the first official release. I wanted to release it so poeple could see it was serious and have people use it to help test, report bugs, suggest features and spread the word around. I've been working on this only project since July so you can imagine why I need a break on this.

---

quote:

---

ClickHeRe said:

This is not the final version, some other versions will be published later including bugfixes, new material and suggestions made by people. the development version can still be downloaded with the latest snapshot at http://dcx.scriptsdb.org/dcx.zip.

---

quote:

---

ClickHeRe said:

I got no clue on who wants to build a DCX studio, but it ain't gonna be me =].

---

Text edited by author on Dec 17, 2005 @ 7:05PM

quote:

---

ClickHeRe said:

If you need to post suggestions or bugs, please use this bug tracker tool associated with my projects : http://dcx.scriptsdb.org/bug

and thanks for the review.

Only thing needed now is people using it and community stuff building around it : tutorials, help in other languages amd maybe a DCX Studio!

---

Text edited by author on Dec 17, 2005 @ 7:04PM