Unfortunately that Game of Life app actually has little "Critter" objects for
each of the blue circles that it plots, so it's not much of a help. Each
critter just knows how to draw itself with a probabilistic shade of blue.
Keeping buffers of image objects and drawing to them directly, as _why
describes in that gmane post, and then printing them to the screen as
desired, seems like a great way to go ... Quote:
-* altering image pixels *-
to get a pixel:
@icon[left, top]
#=> color or pattern
to set a pixel:
@icon[left, top] = color or pattern.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:08 AM "Jordan Applewhite"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>Also, there is a cellular automata sample in the Shoebox, but I haven't read
> it:
>
> http://www.the-shoebox.org/apps/24
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Jordan Applewhite <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.lib.shoes/1558/match=new+image
> >
> > In that post, _why describes how you can draw shapes and images on images
> > without creating objects. He also shows how you can do per-pixel
> > manipulation. Is this kind of what you were looking for?
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Hugh Sasse <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I can't see anything in the manual about plotting individual points
> >> (though I suppose I could plot circles of size 1, but it makes the
> >> intent somewhat less clear, I think), and I can't find anything
> >> about reading the colour at an individual point. [I'm wondering
> >> about using the existing canvases in shoes as cellular automata,
> >> keeping the memory footprint as small as possible by not replicating
> >> information on a canvas in a big array.]
> >>
> >> Also, the Wiki linked off from shoooes.net doesn't seem to have a
> >> search facility. I could use google but it's a common expectation
> >> for Wikis, and they can usually do intelligent things google won't
> >> (or won't easily?) such as telling you if titles match or only text
> >> within pages match.
> >>
> >> Have I overlooked something obvious?
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Hugh
> >>
> >
> >
>
