Re: chickenpox: dia in LWN (again)

[Cyrille Chepelov <cyrille chepelov org>]

Le Sat, Mar 20, 2004, Ã  01:00:53AM +0100, Lars Clausen a écrit:

> More or less.  I just think that the virtual and edge CPs are much more
> generally useful than the body CPs, and so should be looked at first. 
> But then, they're also more complicated, aren't they?  I think the edge
> connections are well enough served by ordinary connections for now, but
> the virtual CPs have the big advantage of allowing extremely easy
> diagram manipulation.  No more scrounging around for CPs, no more
> adjusting the lines because you moved the object to where the line
> crosses it.  And nice-looking, too.

The main problem with "virtual" and "edge" (and it's to some extent, shared 
with "body") is in finding the outer edge of the object or shape. And this
is fairly common to all types of elements.


> > OK. Will try to get some of the support code up as I get the time (one thing
> > I'm pretty sure of -- ConnectionPoints need to be identified by ID, not by
> > index like we do now, with all the contorsions in CPL; no matter how the UI
> > looks like eventually, we'll need freedom in the way to access and refer to
> > CPs). 
>
> That is true.  But I suppose there's no problem in having the existing
> CPs identified by, say, low integers:)

True.  But then every bit of code which dereferences a CP will have to take
this difference into account -- yuck -- 

Saw your page on faemalia; makes a lot of sense.

        -- Cyrille

--