On Sat, 2008-02-23 at 19:16 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > Hi, > > I moved things to http://bugzilla.o-hand.com/show_bug.cgi?id=815 > and have my work-in-progress patch on there.
thanks for the patch; it's quite a big chuck of work, so bear with me for asking a couple of questions after reading it. Clutter diverges quite quickly from a 2D canvas as soon as you start considering rotations around the X and Y axis, and the depth handling; how would you handle the issue of actors at different angles and depths? I mean: would a container be able to reflow around these kind of transformations? would it even be possible? another question pertains the recomputing the layout, especially the chain up to the stage; how would a complex layout impact the performances of Clutter? you note, in clutter_actor_get_allocation(): + /* FIXME - if needs_allocation=TRUE, we can either 1) + * g_return_if_fail, which limits calling get_allocation to inside + * paint() basically; or we can 2) force a layout, which could be + * expensive if someone calls get_allocation somewhere silly; or we + * can 3) just return the latest value, allowing it to be + * out-of-date, and assume people know what they are doing. + * For now doing 3) out of laziness. + * + * The least-surprises approach that keeps existing code working is + * likely to be 2). People can end up doing some inefficient things, + * though, and in general code that requires 2) is probably broken. + */ I'm actually quite scared of people blocking a relayout operation (and thus a redraw) during an animation, which would suck to no end. personally, I'd rather limit the options rather than allow people to do stupid things. ciao, Emmanuele. -- Emmanuele Bassi, OpenedHand Ltd. Unit R, Homesdale Business Centre 216-218 Homesdale Rd., Bromley - BR12QZ http://www.o-hand.com -- To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
