2008/4/18 Michael van der Gulik mikevdg@gmail.com:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers gazzaguru2@btinternet.com wrote:
It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A
"fuzz/blur"
effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such
things.
Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large performance penalties.
Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to
a
bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)). Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.
If you were to implement some more interesting effects in BitBLT, how would you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?
1. BitBlt already contains many blitting rules which is problematic to support on different back ends. 2. In future, i suppose, we need a more functional approach how to define drawing operations. To describe a blitting/drawing operations with classes/objects not with integer numbers, like we currently have, which is meaningless and hard to determine how they working.
Drawing operation should be represented by object - a function(source, destination, arguments..), where function is fully reflected in language.
Gulik
-- http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg http://gulik.pbwiki.com/ _______________________________________________ UI mailing list UI@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui