So the word from Pam is that using ints should be fine. On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 11:12 AM, Pamela Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> +appleton, who can comment if he disagres > > Both Bounds and Point are generally used to represent pixel coordinates > (and worded that way in the reference), so since pixels can't be divided, > using int should be fine. I don't think I've ever tried to pass a fraction > to them myself. > > Note: We do have a special GScreenPoint class which does take fractions and > is used by screen > overlays:<http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/reference.html#GScreenPoint> > http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/reference.html#GScreenPoint > > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 7:12 AM, Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [-GWTC, +pamelafox] >> >> Hello Pamela, >> >> Miguel & I wanted to check with you to see if you thought it important >> that Bounds() and Point() should support fractional values. I know it makes >> no difference in JS, there being no integer type, but it matters in Java and >> how users expect the API to work. The documentation says these are for pixel >> values, so I assumed they should be integers. To date, we have modelled the >> inputs and outputs from these methods as 'int' types in Java. I looked >> through geometry.js but it wasn't entirely enlightening. The safest thing >> we can do is to pass doubles through, but I think this would be a bit >> confusing to users (what happens if you position a control at .5 pixels? >> Anti-aliasing?) Can you help us resolve this? >> >> Thanks, >> -Eric. >> >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: Miguel Méndez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Date: Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:59 AM >> Subject: Re: Code Review: gwt-google-apis Maps Convert Bounds to >> JavaScript overlay >> To: Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Cc: GWTcontrib <[email protected]> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:43 AM, Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Miguel Méndez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 5:37 PM, Eric Ayers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> M maps/maps/src/com/google/gwt/maps/client/geom/Bounds.java >>>>> >>>> 37 - This Bounds construction is not part of the Maps API proper and it >>>> is only called from our test code. Do we still need it? >>>> >>> I added this as a convenience, because I was tired of constructing >>> JsArrays over and over in the test code. It results in compiled code just >>> as tight or tighter (if you don't already have Point objects made). We >>> could add a 3rd constructor with 2 point objects. >>> >> >> Sounds like it should be in the test code then. If anything you could >> create a variadic method to take Point arguments and return a >> JsArray<Point>. I would not worry about a third constructor for now. >> >> >>> >>> >>> >>>> 105, 114, 123, 132 - Should get[Max|Min][X|Y] just return doubles? The >>>> JS API just states that this is a Number however the documentation would >>>> lead you to believe that it is really an integer value. It seems like the >>>> safest thing to do would be to use a double. Maybe Pam could shed some >>>> light? This would call into question the newPoint method. >>>> >>> >>> This sounds familiar - have we been through this before? Along with >>> Point, this object represents pixels on the screen. Of course, JS doesn't >>> have an integer type, but I see in the JS code that pixel values (stored in >>> the Bounds object) are looped through with for loops with operators like x++ >>> and y--, indicating to me they are intended to be integers. >>> >>> >> >> We have been through this before, but it seems that every instance in the >> maps API is unique. ++ and -- are valid for floating point also it might be >> more illuminating to look at the terminating condition for the loop. Better >> yet, just double check with Pam. >> >> -- >> Miguel >> >> >> >> -- >> Eric Z. Ayers - GWT Team - Atlanta, GA USA >> http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/ >> > > -- Eric Z. Ayers - GWT Team - Atlanta, GA USA http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
