more reasonable docking behavior

[peclik]

• left & right panels grab the whole window height
• top & bottom panels have the same width as input editor & result window
• it's more reasonable the lists take full height (more items visible) and especially expected behavior for dockable bitfield widget (and other widget i'm working on)
• also enables nesting panels (more docks side by side on the same side) - more freedom for user and again will be good for bitfield and other similar widgets
• .ini or Layout\State setting must be deleted (otherwise new docking style will not be activated by Qt and strange things can happen)

[heldercorreia]

I like it. I have one question though: what's the plan to make this work when people download the new version with this feature included? Asking users to remove Layout/State is not an option :) Maybe we could introduce version checking in the settings, and when 0.12 gets released, it would search for 0.12, not find it, thus resetting Layout/State value. Thoughts?

[peclik]

Your idea is good. The drawback is that people will loose their layout setting. Which brings me to the thoughts of having brand new expert option :-) - docking style. Changing it will reset layout setting.

[heldercorreia]

Not sure we should put the docking style inside an expert option. I think a version checking followed by a warning dialog about the possible loss of layout would suffice. Would you like to tackle that into this patch?

[peclik]

I'm thinking of people who will complain about changed docking style... But for me personally it's no problem if new style will be enforced - I like this style much more. I will tackle it into this patch.

[heldercorreia]

I don't think there's a massive behavior change so that people will even notice it. Besides, after years leading SpeedCrunch, I've learned that no matter what you do people will complain :)

[peclik]

I've added window state reset for old settings. (Without warning dialog - I think dialog would be too much for such negligible thing - extra code, translations...)

[heldercorreia]

Agree with the dialog. A note in the announcement should be good.
But using a numerical value for the version is actually more common, see QT_VERSION as an example in http://code.woboq.org/qt5/qtbase/src/corelib/global/qglobal.h.html

[peclik]

Ok, application version format changed to 0xMMNNPP.

[heldercorreia]

Sorry for the delay. Actually, I'd prefer if we used the already existing SPEEDCRUNCH_VERSION (see gui/aboutbox.cpp). Please note that the variable contains a C string. Do you mind adapting your patch to use it?