[Misfeature] GroupBox deosn't have XP style

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)
Yes you are right It's been a wild guess. I just looked at the msdn and saw there are no parts ans state defined for static controls.
I support Alextp idea of removing these controls.

[Alextp]

I support Alextp idea of removing these controls.

Not removing at all - removing out of GroupBoxes.

[CoolWater]

Any ideas how to solve this problem?

Just draw the groupbox frame on a label. But the x and cx coords of the frame are < 0 and accordingly > width to cut off the round edges. So you will have a single "separator" line without round edges. Maybe, this is only a solution for the standard/themed xp groupbox frame.

IMHO, there is no appropriate theme function for this task.

Regards,
CoolWater

[ghisler(Author)]

I have implemented your suggestions now, plus a third one, and would like to get your opinion. Have a look at this image, please:
http://ghisler.ch/img/groupbox2.gif

The topmost uses a groupbox inside of a groupbox. The second draws just the top line of a groupbox. The third uses no separator at all. What do you think?

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)

The second draws just the top line of a groupbox.

How did you do that?

[ghisler(Author)]

That's not difficult - I call DrawThemeBackground, which takes two RECT parameters: The first is the size of the item to be drawn, the second is the clipping rectangle. So I just set the clipping rectangle to the size of the top line, and the item size to +50 pixels to the left and right, and +100 pixels to the bottom. Windows XP then draws a groupbox much larger than the available space, but draws only the part within the available space...

[Lefteous]

2ghisler(Author)
I hope there are no themes around which begin the drawing of the top line a few lines below the top of the rectangle...

[Flint]

I have implemented your suggestions now, plus a third one, and would like to get your opinion.

Looks very nice! If it works fine (without artefacts), I'd vote for the second variant.

[CoolWater]

I have implemented your suggestions now, plus a third one, and would like to get your opinion.

Looks very nice! If it works fine (without artefacts), I'd vote for the second variant.

Support++

[Alextp]

2ghisler(Author)
I vote for the third (without bevel at all).

[szlori]

I vote for the second one as well.
The horizontal separator adds a nice tidyness to the dialog.

[Hacker]

I also vote for second.

Roman

[karlchen]

I have implemented your suggestions now, plus a third one, and would like to get your opinion. Have a look at this image, please:
http://ghisler.ch/img/groupbox2.gif

The topmost uses a groupbox inside of a groupbox. The second draws just the top line of a groupbox. The third uses no separator at all. What do you think?

I definitely prefer the topmost version, the groupbox inside the groupbox.
But I can live with the second version as well.
I am even willing to put up with the separatorless version, if the majority votes for it.

Karl

[SQUIRE]

I'd take the 3rd option. It's far less cluttered and easier to read without unnecessary margins.

[majkinetor !]

I vote for 4th!
It is less cluttered then all other options, and without margins at all. Acctually, you can't see it at all, but you know it is there, containg your font of choice, layin' invisible there ... and all that...

Now, if we are finished with make-up, can we move on more serious topics, like Unicode, Scripts, Icons in Menus, Multithreading, Unified Command System, Recycle Bin with Folders...


BTW, install WindowBlinds or StyleXP and you will have anything you like there, as you like, you can even create something new, like bold marguins with the little elephants in the middle...