> > So, if anyone is aware of the reason for its placement, it would be most > > helpful to learn more about that before making the final decision > > whether to keep/remove it. > > Because objectboxes and messageboxes and atomboxes have > become opaque, so > the stacking order of wires does matter more. They have to stay on top in > order to be more visible, yet the pd architecture is not sophisticated > enough to allow pd to force all of its externals to draw all boxes _under_ > the wires.
Well, in that case the line in question is a band aid on the problem, not a fix. Such a redraw call should not try to redraw all cords but only those that are visible, otherwise you get potentially excessive error outputs from tcl/tk reporting that there is no such cord/canvas (e.g. for the ones embedded in sub-patches) that bog pd down. If you have a large patch, you can get literally hundreds of those per every GUI update that eat precious cpu cycles. There should be a loop that goes through all existing cords and checks whether they are visible and if so, raises them. Otherwise, they should be ignored. Ico _______________________________________________ Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev
