Adi Oanca <adioanca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/16/05, Axel Dörfler <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > layer - maybe it should be called GetRootLayerIntersection() then? > Ufff, it's not clear at all. Intersect with what RootLayer region? > AFAIUnderstand, I'm requesting the intersection with the visible > region of RootLayer, which definitely does not do. I honestly don't know why you keep reading "visible" out of everywhere, though ;-) [...] > > It's always problematic if a super class knows its sub classes - I > > would consider this a bug in the design, anyway, and I will try to > > get > > rid of this during refactoring. > Clipping code is in Layer class. It needs to know about the screen > bounds somehow. Sorry, and again, I don't agree at all. This is a basic point in good class design - it should only be neglected if no other way is possible (usually for work-arounds of bugs in other (closed) code). I consider the current design of the Layer/RootLayer class to be broken; I don't see any reason why Layer should know the RootLayer class at all. Therefore, I'll do the following next (when resuming to work on that place): a) I will introduce GetExtent() as proposed b) I will fix the design and remove *all* RootLayer references in the layer class (and if that includes a RootLayer::GetIntersectWith() or whatever is necessary, so be it - if you're not happy with that name, just propose another one, of course) Any objections? Bye, Axel.