Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-14 Thread stepharo
Yes fullFrame would be better. Now we should rewrite all the senders and I do not have cycles now for that. But if people want to do a pass go ahead. better LayoutFrame identity :) Well, maybe the comment could say that the 0@0 corner: 1@1 rectangle is the identity ;) No because we do not

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread Tudor Girba
Hi, This issue is still pending: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/7077/LayoutFrame-refactoring Let us fix the Glamour issues and then we can deprecate it. Cheers, Doru > On Jan 9, 2016, at 11:54 AM, Thierry Goubier > wrote: > > Stef, > > could you deprecate the

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread stepharo
Le 9/1/16 11:15, Tudor Girba a écrit : Hi, This issue is still pending: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/7077/LayoutFrame-refactoring Let us fix the Glamour issues and then we can deprecate it. Yes please. I should said that I was discouraged when I saw Glamour code but this is easy to

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread stepharo
Hi thierry Stef, could you deprecate the use of fractions:offsets: ? It's a nice way of shooting oneself in the foot. Yes we should in fact. Today I was thinking that there may be cases where this api makes sense but your remark in the bug tracker made me think and you are right. Create a

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread Tudor Girba
> On Jan 9, 2016, at 9:09 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote: > > Le 09/01/2016 13:59, stepharo a écrit : >> Hi thierry >>> Stef, >>> >>> could you deprecate the use of fractions:offsets: ? It's a nice way of >>> shooting oneself in the foot. >> Yes we should in fact. >>

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread Thierry Goubier
Le 09/01/2016 13:59, stepharo a écrit : Hi thierry Stef, could you deprecate the use of fractions:offsets: ? It's a nice way of shooting oneself in the foot. Yes we should in fact. Today I was thinking that there may be cases where this api makes sense but your remark in the bug tracker made

[Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread stepharo
Here is the new class comments I'm trying to write. I hope that it will help people to understand the circumstances under which they should use fractions:offset: creation API. I define a transformation frame relative to some rectangle. I'm basic data structure used for graphics. I

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
that’s important. I never understood LayoutFrame… I always finish doing random stuff until I have something that “more or less” works :) > On 09 Jan 2016, at 09:56, stepharo wrote: > > Here is the new class comments I'm trying to write. > I hope that it will help people to

Re: [Pharo-dev] About LayoutFrame>>fractions:offsets:

2016-01-09 Thread Thierry Goubier
Stef, could you deprecate the use of fractions:offsets: ? It's a nice way of shooting oneself in the foot. Create a LayoutFrame taking all space: LayoutFrame fractions: (0@0 corner: 1@1) right? Create a layout frame taking all space with an inset of three, so an offset of +3 left and