Am 31.07.2008 04:30, Sameer Sahasrabuddhe schrieb:
I think it is exactly this way in all the objects Dia has. Connecting a handle somewhat requires to move it, doesn't it?On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Hans Breuer <hans breuer org> wrote:No. There are handles on every object. They are represented by the little squares. Some of them are connectable (see lib/handle.h:HandleConnectType) and some of them are non-movable (lib/handle.h:HandleType). Non-movable handles - as in "UML - Class" - drawn in (almost) black. Movable, not connected handles are drawn in green. Connected handles are drawn in red.That's still not unambiguous enough. Here's what I understand. There are two properties to a Handle: connectable, and movable. One would assume these two are orthogonal, so that there can be four types of handles such as "connectable and non-movable" and so on. From your description, it _seems_ that if a Handle is non-movable, then the"connectable" property does not matter.
It appears so (the gui only reflects three states, see app/handle_ops.c:handle_color), but I did not analyze the source further to know for sure if it is enforced or just convention.So in fact there are only three types of handles, because the two types that are non-movable, actually represent the same set. Is that correct?
(-: ... still I fail to see the reason to discuss this particular source codes explaination in this length. For me it seems to be enough when the source code is non-ambiguous. It is the "final truth" no matter how well or bad the explainations are...Luckily it is not English to compile. If you can not descrive the connection of just a line and a box, than English is just not expressive enough to describe Dia's reality.Big words, there! Assuming a missing smiley as usual!
Back to coding, Hans -------- Hans "at" Breuer "dot" Org ----------- Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to get along without it. -- Dilbert