Hi Malte, > But I am not sure if I like to have two functions for the same thing - > Size and Point are basically the same.
Are they? Only "basically", or also effectively? That is, I seem to remember (not sure) that in the VCL world, converting a Point will not yield the same result as converting a Size, at least not in all cases. There was something with the scaling set at the device's MapMode, or the offset at the device, or something like this ... Thus, I suggested to Lars to use different versions for Size and Point in the UNO API, too. If you say this is not needed, then we should get rid of it. Well, perhaps. Finally, it's also a question of convenience, as you say yourself ... Having a Point/Size which needs to be converted would be Point aPos( getSomePoint() ); aPos.X = xDevice.convertToPixel( aPos.X, MapUnit ); aPos.Y = xDevice.convertToPixel( aPos.Y, MapUnit ); as opposed to Point aPos( xDevice.convertPointToPixel( getSomePoint(), MapUnit ) ); > Conclusion might be to have a function using long, instead of > point/size, but having two calls for one size/point conversion is also > not nice. Will converting an X-value always yield the same result as converting the same number as Y-value? That is: If I have, say, a "Size( 100, 100 )", will the converted Size also have width=height? At least in VCL, where the MapMode can have different Scale values for X and Y, this would not be the case. Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
