<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Approximatrix Forums — problem with text box]]></title>
		<link>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?id=733</link>
		<atom:link href="http://forums.approximatrix.com/extern.php?action=feed&amp;tid=733&amp;type=rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<description><![CDATA[The most recent posts in problem with text box.]]></description>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2020 19:55:28 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>PunBB</generator>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: problem with text box]]></title>
			<link>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3409#p3409</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>That would occur most likely because the C function (most of AppGraphics is in C) is called directly rather than via a Fortran wrapper.&nbsp; I can make sure anything accepting a logical in AppGraphics is expecting a common LOGICAL(4) instead.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (jeff)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2020 19:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3409#p3409</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: problem with text box]]></title>
			<link>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3408#p3408</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Jeff.<br />Thanks for the explanation. I have also noticed inconsistency (?) in the use of logical kind.<br />For example, enabletextbox procedure accepts LOGICAL(4) whereas e.g. checkboxsetchecked<br />requires LOGICAL(1). Is it on purpose? I am using SF 3.8<br />Carlos</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (Carlos Herrera)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Sat, 18 Jan 2020 12:49:58 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3408#p3408</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[Re: problem with text box]]></title>
			<link>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3405#p3405</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Carlos,</p><p>The <em>settextjustify</em> call was not originally supposed to affect text boxes.&nbsp; The AppGraphics text box is implemented via a <a href="https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/controls/edit-control-styles">Windows Edit Control</a>.&nbsp; When you set the horizontal justification using <em>settextjustify</em> in AppGraphics, the text box is assigned the appropriate style, <em>ES_LEFT</em>, <em>ES_RIGHT</em>, or <em>ES_CENTER</em>, as shown on the <a href="https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/controls/edit-control-styles">linked page</a>.&nbsp; However, Windows does not provide a way to vertically justify text in a box, at least as simply as the horizontal justification.</p><p>So the above is an explanation for the current behavior.&nbsp; I&#039;m not sure we&#039;d be able to implement the vertical justification for the text box.</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (jeff)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Fri, 17 Jan 2020 12:30:55 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3405#p3405</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[problem with text box]]></title>
			<link>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3402#p3402</link>
			<description><![CDATA[<p>Jeff,<br />It seems, that text in textbox is always top-justified, independently<br />on vert settings defined by calling settextjustify procedure (SF 3.7).<br />Carlos</p>]]></description>
			<author><![CDATA[null@example.com (Carlos Herrera)]]></author>
			<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jan 2020 21:28:46 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://forums.approximatrix.com/viewtopic.php?pid=3402#p3402</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
