Hello Sandro, Wednesday, November 7, 2007, 11:56:05 AM, you wrote: SS> Wrong. Another trick is pressing '-' and '+' to decrement SS> and increment the alpha. Using this you can see that SS> the pp considers the two squares on the right as two subshapes, SS> which overlap thus giving different saturation in the center SS> then on the borders (where there's no overlap).
Ah, I see. Yes. So moveTo() starts a new subshape too, right? SS> I'd like to commit the patch fixing the 'four-in-a-row' and SS> 'opposite-el' drawing first, Ok. SS> unless you think the Ming test can SS> reveal we don't necessarely need to close those paths.. Nope, we will always need closed paths (all rasterizer kinds). SS> Feel free to give Ming a try yourself meanwhile :) You don't want to know how many things I am currently doing at the same time, trust me... ;) Udo _______________________________________________ Gnash-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnash-dev
