On 8/11/08, René Dudfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hi, > > have you added a test case? > > I'm pretty sure this changes the behavior of previous pygame, so we > decided to keep the behavior. > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 8:34 AM, Lenard Lindstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Lenard Lindstrom wrote: > >> > >> claudio canepa wrote: > >>> > >>> 2. When blitting (with no blend flags) an opaque pixel ( alpha channel > at > >>> 255 ) over any other pixel, seems natural that the resulting color be > the > >>> src color. (opaque is opaque, right ?). In most cases pygame is off by > one, > >>> by example: > >>> . dst is filled with (x,0,0,128) > >>> . src is filled with (0,z,0,255) > >>> . dst.blit(src,(0,0)) will be filled with ( 0, z-1, 0, 255) ( > >>> minusblit.py demoes this ) > >>> > >>> > >> Thanks for bringing it to our attention. This was a known bug in Pygame > >> 1.7 and was fixed previous to Pygame 1.8. Apparently the bug was > >> reintroduced in an attempt to optimize the code. I will repair it. > >> > > Bug fixed in SVN revision 1608. > > > > -- > > Lenard Lindstrom > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >
Can developers add a brief note to documentation when a bug is intentionally kept ? It is a waste of time to perpetually build 'bug demos' (users) , add - remove code (developers). Besides, undocumented wrong behavior is awfull when writing tests ! -- claxo
