Alan Jay Weiner wrote:
>
> > Methinks one easy way around this is would be to hold input until the
> >pen is released, a la
> >
> > case penDown:
> > do
> > EvtGetPen(&penX, &penY, &penDown);
> > while (penDown);
>
> EvtGetPen can only exacerbate the problem. It passes back the last-known pen
> position, so if there are rapid taps, it could miss some of the positions.
>
> For example:
>
> event 1: pen down
> event 2: pen up
>
> Fitaly gets event 1, calls EvtGetPen and gets the proper pen-down coordinate
>
> event 3: pen down somewhere else
>
> Fitaly gets event 2, calls EvtGetPen bug gets event 3's position rather than
> event 2's position.
But if you're handling penDown/penUp's in your own event loop
then you should never get a penUp event. You should only be
watching for penDown events. Or am I missing something simple?
In your example, if you used an EvtGetPen loop, event #2 would
never even be posted, and that would simplify things somewhat. So
event #3, a penDown, _should_ then get detected reliably.
Regards,
Daniel.
