On Friday 29 February 2008 8:34:42 am Scott Wallace wrote:
> Hi, Subbu,
..
> As before, if "flip" or "tumble" is applied to a SketchMorph which has
> been *rotated*, there are surprising and (nearly) unpredictable visual
> results.
> I think (maybe) people would expect that sending "flip" to an objet
> seen on the screen, whether or not the object had previously been
> rotated, would horizontally flip the bits of *as seen on the screen*
> -- not the bits of a different, unseen, "original form".
A SketchMorph is live object that can move around in the screen. I interpreted 
flip as a message I would send to the morph - i.e. flip around *its own* 
vertical axis.

> So, arguably, we should incorporate your code in etoys3.0...?
> However, having waited this long, let's wait just a little while
> longer, in case anyone cares to try his hand at an implementation that
> gives what I suggest to be the more intuitive result for sketches that
> have been rotated and resized, and/or, more ambitiously, for sketches
> which have embedded submorphs.
>
> In hopes of stirring up a little more conversation on this ...
It sure needs more discussion. Perhaps MorphicObject (an assembly of objects 
with state/behavior/shape) could be factored out from Morph (a wrapper form 
associated with a morphic object that can be transformed and painted on a 
canvas).

Subbu