I like this interpretation. I don't think it is a popular view, but it makes sense to me.
I would change the range wording, though, to something like this: Pixel 0 ranges from 0 to 1. For example, the rect of a card has zeros. Maybe it depends on whether one wants to draw pixels on the intersections of the lines on the graph paper, or in between. > On Jun 14, 2019, at 1:55 PM, hh via use-livecode > <use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > > Nothing is wrong: > If you have a row then left is the integer left of first pixel > and right is the integer right of last pixel. > > So left and right are the integers that limit the object, NOT pixel numbers. > > As to your example: > pixel 1 ranges from 0 to 1, ... pixel 12 ranges from 11 to 12. > The left is 0, the right is 12, the width is 12=right-left. > >> Richard H. wrote: >> Playing around with a couple of things needing alignment, I’ve noticed that >> the math on widths and edges isn’t quite right. >> For example, I have a boundary rect of width 12, with a left of 0 and a >> right of 12. >> One of these is wrong . . . a width of 12 would go from 0 to 11; 0 to 12 is >> 13 pixels wide . . . >> It seems that “right” actually means, “the pixel to the right of” . . . > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > _______________________________________________ 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