On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 12:00 -0500, Havoc Pennington wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Emmanuele Bassi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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? > > I think it does not; all of that stuff is done only at paint-time. > Scale, rotation, depth, and translate (anchor point) affect the paint > box, but not layout. At least that's what my patch does and what I > think is simplest and most useful.
I agree. > One implication is that if you animate any of these paint-only > transformations, the layout is not recomputed for each frame. which was my biggest worry, so thanks for addressing that. > > 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(): > > Ah, what I was saying in this comment is that get_allocation() really > should only be called inside paint(). In that context, it is just > returning actor->allocation. > > If someone calls it elsewhere, they're doing something that really > does not make sense, because the allocation could be outdated. So the > comment is just about how to try to make sense of what they might > mean. > > I ended up making get_size() be the "do what I mean" function, so I > think get_allocation() should probably just return the most recent > allocation even if it isn't really valid. That will always be fast, at > least. okay, it makes sense. 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]
