12 Sep
2016
12 Sep
'16
3 p.m.
2016-09-12 14:14 GMT+02:00 Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com>om>:
On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 11:56:05AM +0200, Nicolai Hess
wrote:
The extent of the surface of TRMorph, yes, but not the extent of the
surface in TRCanvas, and I am not sure why the surface is needed in
TRCanvas anyway,
The drawing happens on the surface from TRMorph, no ?
TRMorph allInstances collect:[:s | s extent].
"{(452.0(a)430.0)}"
TRCanvas allInstances collect:[:s | s extent].
"{(500@500). (452.0(a)430.0)}"
TRCanvas allInstances collect:[:s | s canvas extent] .
"{(500@500). (500@500)}"
We have on TRCanvas with extent 500@500 and one with 452@430, but both
"canvas" inst vars of the TRCanvas
have an extent of 500@500
During debugging the Athens-Crash I found
something strange about
TRCanvas
(not responsible for the crash)
1. TRCanvas canvas instance variable is not a AthensCairoCanvas at all
but
an AthensCairoSurface
2. the canvas resp. surface is initialized with TRCanvas initial extent
but
a change on TRCanvas extent does not change the
surfaces extent
3. Is this canvas resp. surface actually used ? Do we only need it to
manage some external resources (path/ image forms) ?
the surface is recreated when the extent has changed (in TRMorph), plus
for some reason it is always initialized twice (presumably by accident),
so I think some fixes are needed there.
Peter
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev