Re: Limit on pixles in a group [ was: Re: Max number of columns in a datagrid?]
On 27/11/2018 18:34, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: The existing field object does a fine job buffering for smooth scrolling of just about any text of practical length. Logically, the limit of field contents is about 4GB (UINT4), but in practical terms other memory needs may not allow quite that much. FWIW I've loaded the Bible into a field and it scroll quite nicely, much more smoothly than Microsoft Word's paging scroll. Yes, a scrolling field is fine. But if you wanted to have a field (no scroll bar) and other controls overlaid (or beside) the field and have the whole thing scroll (as a group), then you could run into the pixel limitation. Wouldn't you ? Or maybe I'm missing something. > And if we were to consider non-European languages, maybe that would > apply horizontally as well ?? What non-European languages have no line wrapping? How do such languages display anything on any electronic or printed surface? I didn't say "no line wrapping". There are (I think) languages which can be written vertically (e.g. Japanese, Korean), and in this case you get a series of vertical lines - and a series of those vertical lines placed adjacent to each other, requiring horizontal scroll to get through the document (i.e. a complete transposition of English). So the pixel limit night then be relevant for horizontal, just as it is for vertical. But as you say - so long as you stick to scrolling the field, not putting an unscrolled field into a scrolled group, you won't hit the group pixel limit anyway. And - since I can barely spell Unicode, far less understand all the implications - I'll go back to being quiet now :-) Alex. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Re: Limit on pixles in a group [ was: Re: Max number of columns in a datagrid?]
Alex Tweedly wrote: > On 25/11/2018 23:04, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: >> >> This limitation may have been eliminated, or close to eliminated, >> with the field object. And now that fields have column-independent >> alignment, it's rare that there's ever a need to replace that one >> object with a thousand-object DataGrid for simple list views. >> >> The DataGrid is bound to a limitation within LC for group contents: >> the formattedWidth and formattedHeight of a group cannot exceed 32765 >> px. Attempting to go beyond that flips the signed bit internally and >> objects will be rendered incorrectly. >> >> I suppose it might be nice to see that extended, but in practice do we >> really need it? How big should a group meaningfully be? >> >> 32,765 px is about 30 feet in size. That's a lot to ask a user to >> scroll through, not to mention being a lot to ask LC to buffer so it >> can handle the scroll efficiently. > > H - 32765 pixels at 227 dpi is "only" about 12 feet :-) > Still too much - except If LC is rendering such high resolution so small, that would be a bug, and a clear indicator that resolution independence would need to be ported from the mobile engine to the desktop engine if it hasn't been already. > While it might be too much for horizontal scrolling, it's not so clear > for vertical scrolling. Twelve feet is about 13 pages vertically of > A4/letter paper; so if I had a document that (for its own reasons) was > in continuous format rather than paginated, I might well want to have > it all in a single group. I probably wouldn't want to scroll through > it - but I might want to have some method of (say) going directy to a > specified chapter or verse - and then see it in its continuous > context. The existing field object does a fine job buffering for smooth scrolling of just about any text of practical length. Logically, the limit of field contents is about 4GB (UINT4), but in practical terms other memory needs may not allow quite that much. FWIW I've loaded the Bible into a field and it scroll quite nicely, much more smoothly than Microsoft Word's paging scroll. > And if we were to consider non-European languages, maybe that would > apply horizontally as well ?? What non-European languages have no line wrapping? How do such languages display anything on any electronic or printed surface? -- Richard Gaskin Fourth World Systems Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web ambassa...@fourthworld.comhttp://www.FourthWorld.com ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Limit on pixles in a group [ was: Re: Max number of columns in a datagrid?]
On 25/11/2018 23:04, Richard Gaskin via use-livecode wrote: This limitation may have been eliminated, or close to eliminated, with the field object. And now that fields have column-independent alignment, it's rare that there's ever a need to replace that one object with a thousand-object DataGrid for simple list views. The DataGrid is bound to a limitation within LC for group contents: the formattedWidth and formattedHeight of a group cannot exceed 32765 px. Attempting to go beyond that flips the signed bit internally and objects will be rendered incorrectly. I suppose it might be nice to see that extended, but in practice do we really need it? How big should a group meaningfully be? 32,765 px is about 30 feet in size. That's a lot to ask a user to scroll through, not to mention being a lot to ask LC to buffer so it can handle the scroll efficiently. H - 32765 pixels at 227 dpi is "only" about 12 feet :-) Still too much - except While it might be too much for horizontal scrolling, it's not so clear for vertical scrolling. Twelve feet is about 13 pages vertically of A4/letter paper; so if I had a document that (for its own reasons) was in continuous format rather than paginated, I might well want to have it all in a single group. I probably wouldn't want to scroll through it - but I might want to have some method of (say) going directy to a specified chapter or verse - and then see it in its continuous context. And if we were to consider non-European languages, maybe that would apply horizontally as well ?? Alex. ___ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode