On 23.07.07, Joerg Lehmann wrote: > Hi Michael, > > > Just to add a single comment from a PyX user: The hatch filling was > > essentially the only feature that caused problems when printing, as > > far as I experienced. The printer was a high-class Lexmark with > > sufficient memory, but the way the hatched patterns are created in PyX > > made it stumble. > > As we know, also Ghostscript is not a particularly perfect hatch > interpreter ;-)
;-) > > Instead of adding more features to this type of patterns, I would > > rather suggest to remove the feature or replace it by a more stable > > one (hatching "by hand": stroking many lines and then clip). In > > combination with parallel deformers, this can be used to create an > > effect such as patterning a line. > So basically we would take the bounding box of the object to determine > the size of the underlying "lattice" and then do it ourselves. But > what kind of object in the PyX class hierarchy would this then be? Right. As it takes a path and returns a canvas, it can only be a pyx.deco.deco. The idea is really to replace the object by the canvas (ornaments), thus the decoratedpath itself should be skipped (via the nostrokerange mechanism). Michael. -- Michael Schindler Laboratoire de Physico-Chimie Théorique. ESPCI. 10 rue Vauquelin, 75231 Paris cedex 05, France. Tel: +33 (0)1 40 79 45 97 Fax: +33 (0)1 40 79 47 31 http: www.pct.espci.fr/~michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ PyX-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pyx-user
