On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 11:24 AM, Seth Willits <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jan 24, 2012, at 5:52 PM, David Duncan wrote: >> Moral of the story is that when a layer is transformed (or may be) you >> should only manipulate its position and bounds. Stay far far away from the >> frame property, as its just a bag of hurt. > > So let me just throw this out there. Is there some reason it couldn't be > changed so that > > > layer.frame = (0, 0, 100, 100); > layer.transform = xfm; > ... > layer.frame = (0, 0, 200, 200); > > > is equivalent to: > > > layer.frame = (0, 0, 100, 100); > layer.transform = xfm; > … > layer.transform = identity; > layer.frame = (0, 0, 200, 200); > layer.transform = xfm; > > > The latter behaves nice and predictably, and if everyone is avoiding the "bag > full of hurt" does it actually break anything? *wishful thinking*
How about we change it by making frame a read-only property? :) --Kyle Sluder _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
