On 18.08.2011 11:12, MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK) wrote:
>
>> Hah, I got it!
>
> Oh yes - good stuff: and that ties in with "Consul" the OP's observation
> in
>
> http://www.fltk.org/newsgroups.php?gfltk.development+v:12583
>
> that setting num_screens to zero "fixes" the issue, too...
Yes, maybe, as a side effect, but you knew that since you wrote
"fixes" ;-)
> So I guess we are in the right area. Do we need a work_xywh() function
> for this one, then?
Yes, I'm absolutely sure now (however we may call and/or implement it -
as a new function or with an additional flag).
Things I'd like to do:
- document this behaviour change of screen_xywh() in the
"Migrating ..." chapter
- implement the new function(s)
- tell the users which new function to call instead, if they have
the same issues as we have now in the FLTK core
- scan the FLTK sources for occurrences of screen_* calls so that we
can replace them with the appropriate new function once we have it,
so that we don't get more surprises in the future.
However, I won't have much time until next week or even later :-(
Any help would be appreciated. If you'd like to continue my
investigations, feel free to do so, but please drop a note here
(or file an STR please) so that we don't do it in parallel. I don't
think that I can find the time before Sunday evening or later.
Albrecht
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
