On Thu, Jun 12, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Break it, as you say, sooner the better. But we need to make sure the > semantic is well defined and we can handle the cases in a consistent > way.
Yes ! I like to break things ! And as I prefer to speek with API in front of my nose, here is a proposed starting point. One that will use FPU : - void evas_object_polygon_point_add(Evas_Object *obj, float x, float y); /* Value for x and y between 0.0 and 1.0 */ The engine will receive a list of point in this float representation with object geometry and clip info. Conversion from float to real Evas_Coord will be done once and for all on change (resize or point_clear). If we don't want FPU, we could have : - void evas_object_polygon_viewport_set(Evas_Object *obj, int w, int h); - void evas_object_polygon_viewport_get(Evas_Object *obj, int *w, int *h); - void evas_object_polygon_point_add(Evas_Object *obj, Evas_Coord x, Evas_Coord y); Of course we can stay with the old API, and just say that more point we add more it extend the internal viewport. But I don't like this at it will silently break the API and it sound hard to understand what the real size of viewport is. So which one do you prefer ? -- Cedric BAIL ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
