[interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- From: DarkWyrm <bpmagic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: interfacekit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 13:18:19 -0400
>Here's my little knowledge:
>Assuming a view to be a visualization of data, it can be considered dirty,
>if it doesn't reflect the current state of the data -- because the data
>have changed or the view was obscured by other components on screen and
>has now become visible, and thus needs to be redrawn. Shortly, a view is
>dirty, if it (or parts of it) needs to be redrawn.
>
>In GUI systems views or parts of it are usually marked dirty by the GUI
>manager (app server in our case) -- e.g. when obscured parts have become
>visible -- or explicitly by the application -- when the data model has
>changed. About the app server internals I don't know much, but on the
>application side BView::Invalidate() can be used.
>
>I suspect most of the work -- management of dirty regions and such -- is
>done in the app server, while the API side classes do little more than
>forwarding the update requests issued by the app server, eventually
>resulting in BView::Draw() invocations.
>
>CU, Ingo
Couldnt have said it better myself. :)
--DW
- References:
- [interfacekit] a "dirty" thing...
- From: Adi Oanca
- [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- From: Ingo Weinhold
Other related posts:
- » [interfacekit] a "dirty" thing...
- » [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- » [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- » [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- » [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- » [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- [interfacekit] a "dirty" thing...
- From: Adi Oanca
- [interfacekit] Re: a "dirty" thing...
- From: Ingo Weinhold