On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:50 PM, Peter Clifton<[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 2009-06-09 at 21:39 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: >> Perhaps some combination of world size, pixel size, and >> relative-to-the-line size ranges with rules about which ones have >> priority? Then you get mostly consistent handles, with limits on how >> big/small they can get relative to usability - I.e. if the width of >> the handle had an upper limit of 50% the length of the line so that >> half the line is always exposed between the two handles, and a lower >> limit of 3x the thickness of the line so that it was never obscured, >> you could otherwise say "keep the handles some fixed number of >> pixels", constrained by those limits, and it would always be usable. > > That might do it.. > > I remember why it doesn't work with fixed pixel sizes now.. the red cue > dot on the end of the line eats the grip when you zoom in to do detailed > work. The line width isn't actually issue unless you're drawing some fat > lines. >
I see that this might be an annoyance with my patch. I solved it by editing my $GEDA/share/gEDA/gschem-colormap-darkbg: - (net-endpoint "#ff0000") + (net-endpoint "#ff0000a0") A bit hacky, but works OK in practice. I think it's better to not mess with the cue size, because it affords a visual reference to how "zoomed-in" you are. Obligatory screenshot: http://vivara.net/images/gschem_cue_grip.png Regards, Mark markra...@gmail -- Mark Rages, Engineer Midwest Telecine LLC [email protected] _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
