Le Tue, Aug 12, 2003, à 04:25:11PM +0200, Sven Vermeulen a écrit:
Are you sure you really need to allocate, construct, copy, then destroy and free a temporary copy of a full-blown Line object each time you draw a double-line?Probably not. There is a templine because I first planned on having the double-line be a little above and below the line that connects the two handles. However, that turned out cumbersome. So it's a leftover that I'll remove asap.
Was the intent to have the connection points not on the centreline but on the two solid lines? Then you need to have two connpoint_lines instead of one -- you should then have a look at the "GRAFCET - Vergent" object (hmmm -- I'm not sure I'd do all I did in the vergent the same way today. Ahem.)
I'd rather not touch the renderers, otherwise I would've made the double-line a style just like dashed and so on. By having most of this code in the line.c itself, compatibility is guaranteed (well, I think it is) since everything seems like just having two lines.
The only thing you'd break by pushing the rendering code into the renderers
is the renderer binary interface -- which is OK, it's been already broken
since 0.91 IIRC. On the other hand, the "double line" style becomes
accessible to other object types (one obvious candidate would be the GRAFCET
vergent -- don't ask me why I didn't make the double line style back
then).
However, I disagree that, should this indeed go to the renderers, this
should be another style just like dashed. I think single/double/more complex
transversal styles is orthogonal to the solid/dotted/dashed/more complex
longitudinal styles we have right now (try to challenge a sentence which says
"transversal is orthogonal to longitudinal, eh? ;-) )
-- Cyrille
--
Attachment:
pgpqwDnpGry8F.pgp
Description: PGP signature