Hi Stephan, Stephan Aßmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> wrote: > > The scaling stuff looks pretty broken to me. > Yes, scaling should be broken. When I worked on app_server more, I > just added > TODOs regarding scaling all over the place. I think scaling should be > added > to the conversion of the local coordinates to parent/top layer > coordinates. > The original Painter implementation, which is still in > src/tests/servers/app/painter folder, had a correct implementation of > the > scaling stuff, at least I tested all kinds of situation of drawing. > One Hm, I can't find any TODOs about scaling, actually - and I only removed those in ServerWindow, as they are no longer true. How exactly would you handle scaling, and why hasn't it been done yet, if it's only a matter of taking it into account when dealing with the coordinate conversion? ;-) > important detail is that user clipping is scaled as well. To scale a > BRegion, > you need to watch out that it stays seamless. For that, you need to > convert > from "pixel indices" to "coordinates on pixel areas". Yes, that makes sense :) > Pen and font size should be handled correctly already, no? At least > for > drawing? (Never got arround testing it.) At least I can confirm pen size - that's one of the few things the ViewState application tests right now :-) > What I didn't test is adding views to a scaled view. I wouldn't be > surprised > if the Be implementation is funny, as with scrolled views. Maybe we > should > maintain a list of stuff that we implement in such a way as not to > break > existing apps, which we change to be more logical when we break > binary > compatibility... :-) I wonder why we have to keep the same amount of brokeness - I would always try to go with the clean version, and only take action when that breaks somewhere. Bye, Axel.