I think it is me who put that code there. But I cannot recall why I did it.
I may have copied that behavior from other code, but cannot find which.
Yes, I agree that the current behavior is not very desirable.
So, anyone who have an idea how this should behave, please go ahead
and fix this.
Regar
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 04:09:48PM -0400, Benjamin Root wrote:
> On Saturday, July 14, 2012, John Hunter wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM, John Hunter
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> I do not understand why in the following example, if I set
> >> patch_alpha=1.0, I do not see the
On Saturday, July 14, 2012, John Hunter wrote:
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM, John Hunter
>
> > wrote:
>
>> I do not understand why in the following example, if I set
>> patch_alpha=1.0, I do not see the shadow effect. I would expect to see it
>> for the the rightmost four bars, where
On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 11:48 AM, John Hunter wrote:
> I do not understand why in the following example, if I set
> patch_alpha=1.0, I do not see the shadow effect. I would expect to see it
> for the the rightmost four bars, where the original bars do not entirely
> occlude the shadow, so even i
I do not understand why in the following example, if I set patch_alpha=1.0,
I do not see the shadow effect. I would expect to see it for the the
rightmost four bars, where the original bars do not entirely occlude the
shadow, so even if alpha is 1.0, there are parts of the shadow that are not
behi
