IMHO, if it works the way you describe, it's doing the right thing, at least mathematically speaking from a point-set viewpoint. Unfortunately, NSUnionRect works like the docs describe, which is not what I needed, so I wrote my own. It's too bad NSUnionRect and CGRectUnion appear to not be consistent. I believe the thinking (at least for NSUnionRect) is that an empty rect is no rect -- sort of an area zero.
The important thing is to know exactly WHAT they are doing and either accept it, or roll your own. This stuff is probably too deeply embedded in everything to expect them to change it. > I just stumbled over this issue with CGRectUnion when one operand is > an empty rect, or has negative width or hight: > > CGRect r1 = CGRectZero; > CGRect r2 = CGRectMake(100.0, 100.0, 300.0, 300.0); > CGRect r3 = CGRectUnion(r1, r2); > > the result for r3 is actually : > r3.origin: (0, 0) > r3.size: (300, 300) > > > > However, according the docs: > "if one of the rectangles has 0 (or negative) width or height, a copy > of the other rectangle is returned; " _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
