Re: proposed updateBacgroundColor() fix

From: Dom Lachowicz (
Date: Mon Jul 29 2002 - 10:55:24 EDT

  • Next message: Joaquin Cuenca Abela: "Re: proposed updateBacgroundColor() fix"

    this isn't a hack, it does address a legitimate problem that really does exist. this will not fix the problem you addressed a few minutes ago, but this problem is equally real. this *needs* to go in. so does a fix to your proposed problem. but they are separate problems that just happen to exist within the same source file or two.

    Tomas, please add a isTransparent method, function, macro, etc... so that testing for transparent colors is easy.


    On Monday, July 29, 2002, at 10:52 AM, j.m.maurer wrote:

    > AFAICT, this is just a hack and doesn't fixes the real problem I
    > addressed is my mail from a few minutes ago.
    > Marc
    > Op ma 29-07-2002, om 16:41 schreef Tomas Frydrych:
    >> At the heart of the problem is the fact that our colour classes cannot
    >> represent transparent colour. My suggestion is that we change the
    >> m_red, m_grn, m_blu members of UT_RGBColor and related from
    >> unsigned char to signed short and use -1,-1,-1 as a representation
    >> of transparent color. This will do away with the need to re-examine
    >> the bgcolor property in fp_Run::updateBackgroundColor().
    >> Any objections? If not, I will do this.
    >> Tomas

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 11:02:24 EDT