Re: Additional issues to address for the constraints_experiments branch?

On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 15:37 -0700, Elijah Newren wrote:
> On 11/14/05, Elijah Newren <newren gmail com> wrote:
> <snip>
> > There are 3 intuitive ways to break this into rectangles (which you
> > listed), none of which satisfy the property I listed before ("a window
> > fits onscreen if and only if it fits in _one_ of these rectangles").
> I realized I was being a bit sloppy with my wording here and may have
> misled for anyone reading closely enough.  The clarified wording would
> be "a window fits in the region if and only if it entirely fits in at
> least one of the rectangles".  (The difference in wording is due to
> the possibility of overlap with these minimal spanning sets; it is
> possible to have a window that can fit into either of two or more
> different spanning rectangles.  The key is that if the window doesn't
> fit into any of the spanning rectangles, then it couldn't possibly fit
> into the region).
> - Elijah

I could say something here about shaped windows, but I don't want you to
start crying :-)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]