Hello,
To FlowLayout users, I am modifying RTAbstractFlowLayout and subclasses for Roassal2 and I would appreciate to hear your opinions on some modifications:
First I changed the Flow layout maxWith value at the initialization to take account of the global area of elements and gapsize. (see screen1, RTObject https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0 )
Then I fixed the align Bottom, so the elements do not collide each others. The only remaining difference is the first line is the less filled. It is due to creating the layout from bottom to up. (The order of elements still remain the same from the left top corner to the right down.) (see screen2 https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0) Does this difference have any importance ?
Finally i am adding a HorizontalFlow layout. (right queued or left queued, using align bottom) See the screen3 ( https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0), the alignement is vertical, do you think it’s usefull ? Should I make a horizontal alignement (In that case it would only be a increasement of maxWidth…) ?
Thank you !
Pierre Chanson
Hi,
Nice work.
The only thing I do not quite understand is why the first line of the bottom aligned flow layout is shorter. The result should remain the same, only there should be an extra step to move at the end.
Also, if you are at it, would it be possible to produce a center aligned version?
Cheers, Doru
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:09 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
To FlowLayout users, I am modifying RTAbstractFlowLayout and subclasses for Roassal2 and I would appreciate to hear your opinions on some modifications:
First I changed the Flow layout maxWith value at the initialization to take account of the global area of elements and gapsize. (see screen1, RTObject https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0 )
Then I fixed the align Bottom, so the elements do not collide each others. The only remaining difference is the first line is the less filled. It is due to creating the layout from bottom to up. (The order of elements still remain the same from the left top corner to the right down.) (see screen2 https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0) Does this difference have any importance ?
Finally i am adding a HorizontalFlow layout. (right queued or left queued, using align bottom) See the screen3 ( https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0), the alignement is vertical, do you think it’s usefull ? Should I make a horizontal alignement (In that case it would only be a increasement of maxWidth…) ?
Thank you !
Pierre Chanson
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Hi,
On 23 Oct 2014, at 15:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
Exactly :). We need an extra step at end to shift the smaller boxes.
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Thanks!
Doru
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one
was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a écrit
:
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this
one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we traverse each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a
écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this
one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
hello,
just a small up,
align Top: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0
align Bottom: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0
align Center: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0
cheers, Pierre
2014-10-23 16:37 GMT-03:00 Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com:
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we traverse each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a
écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this
one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hello,
just a small up,
align Top: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0
align Bottom: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0
align Center: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0
cheers, Pierre
2014-10-23 16:37 GMT-03:00 Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com:
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we traverse each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a
écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this
one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
In my image :D.
But I need to refactor it I think, because there is now much code for each self isAlignTop... And I also need to see to pass the tests because the positions are a little bit different from the test expected positions as the test was based on the old flow layout version.
(moreover i'm also working on a new HorizontalFlow class which needs some fix)
Pierre
2014-10-24 12:13 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote:
hello,
just a small up,
align Top: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0
align Bottom: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0
align Center: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0
cheers, Pierre
2014-10-23 16:37 GMT-03:00 Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com:
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we traverse each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON <chans.pierre@gmail.com
wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
> Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a écrit : > > hello ! > > thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ? > > yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :) > > Pierre > > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
We have included this yesterday. The version of RTFlowLayout seems much better now than before. It is usable :-)
Cheers, Alexandre
On Oct 24, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote: hello,
just a small up,
align Top: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0
align Bottom: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0
align Center: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0
cheers, Pierre
2014-10-23 16:37 GMT-03:00 Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com:
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we traverse each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com wrote: I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by "shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Great.
Doru
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com wrote:
We have included this yesterday. The version of RTFlowLayout seems much better now than before. It is usable :-)
Cheers, Alexandre
On Oct 24, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com
wrote:
hello,
just a small up,
align Top: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7hlsmiklqefb7cn/screen1.png?dl=0
align Bottom: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7kr3gy4e3gwvvgl/screen2.png?dl=0
align Center: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nmgq8cg0f4p3m6u/screen3.png?dl=0
cheers, Pierre
2014-10-23 16:37 GMT-03:00 Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com:
hi Doru,
haa yes I understand now ! Yes it should be the same complexity as we
traverse
each line twice =).
Thanks !!
Pierre
2014-10-23 16:04 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com:
Hi Pierre,
You pretty much doing the same thing as I said only in the reverse
order. My idea was to do a normal flow layout with top alignment and traverse again each line and shift the nodes to the bottom.
But, your algorithm has about the same complexity, so it should be quite
fine.
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 8:38 PM, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com
wrote:
I am sorry Doru but in fact I did not well understood what you meant by
"shift the smaller boxes",
But I finally changed the solution, as another problem came with this
first solution: as I put the last element at 0:0 position then the positions to the fist element are in negative x and y.
So now I browse the elements in the normal order, I just pre-compute the
next line to get the next line biggest element height before creating the line. Not a miracle solution but it works.
thanks !!
pierre
2014-10-23 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel alexandre.bergel@me.com:
Hi Pierre!
I agree with Doru, the layout should remain the same. Maybe we could
have a look at your algorithm next week, but it is doable.
Alexandre
Le 23-10-2014 à 10:26, Pierre CHANSON chans.pierre@gmail.com a
écrit :
hello !
thank you Doru, the thing is the max width is not based on number of
elements but their size in pixel so we can't predict what will be the elements (and so the biggest element height) in the next line so, as a reversed align top, I put the elements from the bottom right corner to the top left. (Just put the elements in the reverse order) The last line is the fist one and less filled. But there is certainly a simple trick to fix this. What about the extra step to move at the end ?
yes I will take a look at the center aligned version, I thought this
one was already working but with a closer look, it's not :)
Pierre
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow" _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Pierre CHANSON -
Tudor Girba