On Sunday, June 24, 2012 12:24:03 AM UTC+1, Richard Jones wrote:
>
> On 24 June 2012 09:20, greenmoss <[email protected]> wrote: 
> > So regarding pixel testing, are you referring to true "ignorant" pixel 
> > testing (eg reading frame buffer values)? I was recently talking to a 
> friend 
> > who is a very good QA tester. He has done pixel-level UI testing, and 
> says 
> > it has certain inherent difficulties which are not at first glance 
> obvious. 
>
> pyglet initially did have this kind of testing, but it was removed 
> because of the reasons you indicate, and the lack of time or 
> motivation needed to produce a tool that could do the testing. 
>
>
>     Richard 
>

Thanks - that's interesting to hear.
 
I was envisioning naively grabbing the screen buffer, and testing for 
approximate colored pixels. I can see that anti-aliasing will result in 
many unexpected colors being present, which I could believe aren't tightly 
controlled by the specification, but I am surprised to hear that it's not 
easy to reproducibly control the color of unaliased drawing.

 You may be right that it's more difficult than I'm imagining then.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pyglet-users" group.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/pyglet-users/-/f38DIzOGGy8J.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pyglet-users?hl=en.

Reply via email to