On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:57:46AM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> The followong patch replaces the hardcoded TEXT_TO_INSET_OFFSET=4 and the
> workarea margin of 10 by respectively 1mm and 2.5mm. These values should be
> equivalent when dpi=100 and zoom=100%.
>
> This idea was
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 08:46:15PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 20/11/15 19:58, PhilipPirrip a écrit :
> >On 11/20/2015 01:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >>Just a note that I have been testing this patch for a few days now and
> >>everything seems to work well.
> >
> >Hi Scott,
> >Your
On 11/20/2015 01:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
Just a note that I have been testing this patch for a few days now and
everything seems to work well.
Hi Scott,
Your screenshot DOES show, though, that the note height has grown, and
that messes up the line spacing (check my screenshot on HiDPI
Le 20/11/15 19:58, PhilipPirrip a écrit :
On 11/20/2015 01:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
Just a note that I have been testing this patch for a few days now and
everything seems to work well.
Hi Scott,
Your screenshot DOES show, though, that the note height has grown, and
that messes up the
On 11/19/2015 02:58 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 19/11/2015 03:17, PhilipPirrip a écrit :
I didn't find placing the cursor difficult, it only looked too tight.
Would you say that the extra horizontal spacing is nevertheless useful?
I'm still good at aiming, can't tell the difference.
Le 18/11/2015 10:57, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit :
Hi there,
The followong patch replaces the hardcoded TEXT_TO_INSET_OFFSET=4 and
the workarea margin of 10 by respectively 1mm and 2.5mm. These values
should be equivalent when dpi=100 and zoom=100%.
This idea was triggered by a message (a
Hi there,
The followong patch replaces the hardcoded TEXT_TO_INSET_OFFSET=4 and
the workarea margin of 10 by respectively 1mm and 2.5mm. These values
should be equivalent when dpi=100 and zoom=100%.
This idea was triggered by a message (a bug) saying that in HiDPI
situations, placing the
On 11/18/2015 05:57 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Hi there,
The followong patch replaces the hardcoded TEXT_TO_INSET_OFFSET=4 and
the workarea margin of 10 by respectively 1mm and 2.5mm. These values
should be equivalent when dpi=100 and zoom=100%.
This idea was triggered by a message (a
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:36:54PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 18/11/15 22:27, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
> > From what I understand, you use a static function as opposed to a static
> >variable because it needs to be constantly recomputed in case, e.g.
> >there is a zoom. First, I do
Le 18/11/15 22:27, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
From what I understand, you use a static function as opposed to a static
variable because it needs to be constantly recomputed in case, e.g.
there is a zoom. First, I do not understand why the value changes for me
if there is a zoom (which it does
Le 19/11/2015 03:17, PhilipPirrip a écrit :
I didn't find placing the cursor difficult, it only looked too tight.
Would you say that the extra horizontal spacing is nevertheless useful?
But now you have some insets grown vertically, they increase the line
spacing which looks a bit messy:
Le 18/11/2015 23:46, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Well, you can expect that the spacing is, say, half of the width of a 'm'.
So if you zoom in, the size increases.
I just did not expect this change from your patch's description since
before, Inset::TEXT_TO_INSET_OFFSET was fixed. I thought that
12 matches
Mail list logo
