10:09 p.m.
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
7:08 a.m.
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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
3:26 p.m.
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
4:29 p.m.
Hi,
On 23 Oct 2014, at 15:26, Pierre CHANSON
<chans.pierre(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
8:32 p.m.
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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
8:38 p.m.
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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
9:04 p.m.
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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
9:37 p.m.
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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
5:11 p.m.
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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moose-dev mailing list
>> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
>
5:13 p.m.
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON <chans.pierre(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
5:31 p.m.
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(a)tudorgirba.com>:
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON <chans.pierre(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>>> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>>> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Moose-dev mailing list
>>>> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
>>> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
1:28 p.m.
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(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Awesome. Where is the code?
Doru
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON <chans.pierre(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
6:44 p.m.
Great.
Doru
On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)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(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
>
> Awesome. Where is the code?
>
> Doru
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 5:11 PM, Pierre CHANSON <chans.pierre(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> > https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)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(a)iam.unibe.ch
> https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
3254
days inactive
3260
days old
12 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Pierre CHANSON -
Tudor Girba