Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
Most people I know have given up StackOverflow. I, myself, have not posted a question for a very long time. On 2019-08-13 6:43 a.m., John-Val Rose wrote: I’ve all but given up on StackOverflow. It seems to be a haven for trolls or control freaks who deem perfectly reasonable questions as off-topic or inappropriate whereby the question then gets put on hold and can’t be answered. It’s ridiculous and makes the forum almost unusable. Some people enjoy the power they have to make this happen and have no interest in helping you or assisting in having your question answered. Sad. On 13 Aug 2019, at 20:34, Mark Raynsford wrote: On 2019-08-12T14:25:37 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: Hello! Here's the StackOverflow question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57461988/using-an-alternate-coordinate-system-inside-a-pane-or-region And, right on cue, the question has been marked as "off-topic". I don't believe that StackOverflow is suitable for general community support. At least half of the interactions I have had with it have ended similarly. Thanks, Michael, for attempting to respond on StackOverflow. Unfortunately, the somewhat rabid moderators have decided that my question isn't worth asking and that your response isn't worth listening to. Sadness. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com
Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
> On 13 Aug 2019, at 18.29, faste...@swingempire.de wrote: > > wow - what an attitude, that's extremely sad :( Did it never occur to you > that users of both SO and this mailing list overlap? > > Please refrain from insulting hard-working members of the community! > > Jeanette > > Jeanette I have to say I share more or less John's view of some the members > of the SO community. And I don't think saying what John said or saying that I share a lot of that view is insulting. Or did you miss interpret what he wrote? He was talking about the overzealous control freaks at the SO (and many other forums) where perfectly valid and of general interested questions are exterminated at whim. Seen that, been the victim of. wbr Kusti
Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
Zitat von John-Val Rose : I’ve all but given up on StackOverflow. It seems to be a haven for trolls or control freaks who deem perfectly reasonable questions as off-topic or inappropriate whereby the question then gets put on hold and can’t be answered. It’s ridiculous and makes the forum almost unusable. Some people enjoy the power they have to make this happen and have no interest in helping you or assisting in having your question answered. Sad. wow - what an attitude, that's extremely sad :( Did it never occur to you that users of both SO and this mailing list overlap? Please refrain from insulting hard-working members of the community! Jeanette
Re: Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
They don’t appear to be rejecting it per say...It sounds like they just want clear and concise question with code snippets (apparently not a link to the code) added and what the desired behavior is. Eric Bresie ebre...@gmail.com > On August 13, 2019 at 5:43:38 AM CDT, John-Val Rose > wrote: > I’ve all but given up on StackOverflow. > > It seems to be a haven for trolls or control freaks who deem perfectly > reasonable questions as off-topic or inappropriate whereby the question then > gets put on hold and can’t be answered. > > It’s ridiculous and makes the forum almost unusable. > > Some people enjoy the power they have to make this happen and have no > interest in helping you or assisting in having your question answered. > > Sad. > > > On 13 Aug 2019, at 20:34, Mark Raynsford wrote: > > > > On 2019-08-12T14:25:37 +0100 > > Mark Raynsford wrote: > > > > > > Hello! > > > > > > Here's the StackOverflow question: > > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57461988/using-an-alternate-coordinate-system-inside-a-pane-or-region > > > > And, right on cue, the question has been marked as "off-topic". > > > > I don't believe that StackOverflow is suitable for general community > > support. At least half of the interactions I have had with it have ended > > similarly. > > > > Thanks, Michael, for attempting to respond on StackOverflow. > > Unfortunately, the somewhat rabid moderators have decided that my > > question isn't worth asking and that your response isn't worth > > listening to. Sadness. > > > > -- > > Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com > >
Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
I’ve all but given up on StackOverflow. It seems to be a haven for trolls or control freaks who deem perfectly reasonable questions as off-topic or inappropriate whereby the question then gets put on hold and can’t be answered. It’s ridiculous and makes the forum almost unusable. Some people enjoy the power they have to make this happen and have no interest in helping you or assisting in having your question answered. Sad. > On 13 Aug 2019, at 20:34, Mark Raynsford wrote: > > On 2019-08-12T14:25:37 +0100 > Mark Raynsford wrote: >> >> Hello! >> >> Here's the StackOverflow question: >> >> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57461988/using-an-alternate-coordinate-system-inside-a-pane-or-region > > And, right on cue, the question has been marked as "off-topic". > > I don't believe that StackOverflow is suitable for general community > support. At least half of the interactions I have had with it have ended > similarly. > > Thanks, Michael, for attempting to respond on StackOverflow. > Unfortunately, the somewhat rabid moderators have decided that my > question isn't worth asking and that your response isn't worth > listening to. Sadness. > > -- > Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com >
Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
On 2019-08-12T14:25:37 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: > > Hello! > > Here's the StackOverflow question: > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57461988/using-an-alternate-coordinate-system-inside-a-pane-or-region And, right on cue, the question has been marked as "off-topic". I don't believe that StackOverflow is suitable for general community support. At least half of the interactions I have had with it have ended similarly. Thanks, Michael, for attempting to respond on StackOverflow. Unfortunately, the somewhat rabid moderators have decided that my question isn't worth asking and that your response isn't worth listening to. Sadness. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
On 2019-08-11T07:15:41 -0500 Eric Bresie wrote: > Are you focused on things from a pane/layout perspective here? Maybe some > different layout might help. > > https://openjfx.io/javadoc/11/javafx.graphics/javafx/scene/layout/package-summary.html > > Or are you looking for some form of “chart” component to allow lines to be > graphed? > > https://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/charts/line-chart.htm > Unfortunately: Both :) Thankfully, though, the two problems are solvable separately and I only need to focus on the first problem (the pane/layout). I need to position objects in a pane, but I do also need to draw a scrollable grid inside that pane. The issue with using the Chart API to draw graph lines is that I think it assumes that graph tick lines on both axes will always have the same spacing. Unfortunately, given the nature of music (with changing time signatures at different points within pieces of music), the spacing between graph tick lines can change at different points on the timeline. Thankfully, I've already written a custom canvas-based component to deal with this. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: Gitter chat + StackOverflow [was: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects]
On 2019-08-11T09:47:22 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: > On 2019-08-11T01:41:39 +0200 > Michael Paus wrote: > > > Nir is right here but if you could ask your question on StackOverflow > > I'd be willing to comment on it because I was facing a very similar > > problem in my projects and I might provide some ideas. Hello! Here's the StackOverflow question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/57461988/using-an-alternate-coordinate-system-inside-a-pane-or-region Out of interest: Is there any interest in setting up a Gitter.im chat room? Given that there apparently isn't a mailing list for user questions, and that there _is_ a GitHub presence for OpenJFX, a Gitter.im chat room would appear to be the logical place for user discussions. I'd be happy to set up and run such a thing. I find Gitter strikes a fairly nice balance in that it's accessible if you already have a GitHub account, it stores a persistent searchable history like a mailing list, but it's also capable of real-time communication if needed, and is accessible without needing any kind of proprietary client. I'm not sure if there's any other service that ticks all of those boxes. I'm open to suggestions, though. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
Are you focused on things from a pane/layout perspective here? Maybe some different layout might help. https://openjfx.io/javadoc/11/javafx.graphics/javafx/scene/layout/package-summary.html Or are you looking for some form of “chart” component to allow lines to be graphed? https://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/charts/line-chart.htm For others on the list...while I can see this list as more focused on development of openjfx...is there a list for users of openjfx and how to code with it? Eric Bresie ebre...@gmail.com > On August 10, 2019 at 10:51:56 AM CDT, Mark Raynsford > wrote: > On 2019-08-06T19:11:42 +0100 > Mark Raynsford wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > I realize the subject is somewhat convoluted. I'm putting together > > something that bears a passing resemblance to a DAW such as Ardour: > > Given the tumbleweeds and sounds of crickets, I'm guessing that I > expressed my question rather poorly. > > Here's what I'm trying to do: I'm trying to set up a pane with a > transform such that I can place objects inside that pane using > positions that don't correspond to JavaFX "scene pixels". For example, > 1024 units in my coordinate system might correspond to 1 "scene pixel" > (is there a better name for the units that JavaFX uses?). However: The > objects that are *inside* the objects that I add to the pane want to > work in "scene pixels" (for example; Labels seem to want to work in > pixel positions when rendering text). > > Here's a GitHub gist that gives a short example of this: > > https://gist.github.com/io7m/20b071e11da2dcd96896a43fad6df644 > > I create one container group (actually a Pane) that adds a transform > such that 1 unit == 32 pixels. I add objects to this container. Each > object I add has an *external* pane with a size and position specified > in units, and an *internal* pane that solely exists to invert the scale > of the transform of the *external* pane. Inside this *internal* pane, I > can add Labels and so on and these all render correctly. > > I set up bindings between the transforms so that I can effectively > scale and pan the scene by adjusting the transform on the group > container. However: Something about this setup seems to be confusing > something inside JavaFX; the results I'm seeing onscreen don't seem to > match what JavaFX believes the bounds of various objects are. This > causes visual issues when I try to do things like set borders on > objects, and also seems to confuse ScenicView. > > Here's a shot with the container group selected (looks correct): > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view0.png > > Here's a shot with the *external* pane of the bottom object selected: > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view1.png > > Note that, although the object actually renders onscreen as the right > size (one of the pale grey boxes), ScenicView seems to believe that the > object's bounds are 1x1: They *are* 1x1, but they're 1x1 when expressed > in my custom coordinate system, not in JavaFX "scene pixels". > > Here's a shot with the *internal* pane of the bottom object selected: > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view2.png > > This looks correct in the sense that the bounds encompass the label and > nothing else. > > Am I doing something wrong here? I can't tell if I'm basically abusing > transforms or not. > > -- > Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com >
Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
On 2019-08-11T01:41:39 +0200 Michael Paus wrote: > Nir is right here but if you could ask your question on StackOverflow > I'd be willing to comment on it because I was facing a very similar > problem in my projects and I might provide some ideas. > > Am 11.08.19 um 01:25 schrieb Nir Lisker: > > I think that this is a better question for StackOverflow. This is a > > development mailing list. The Community section on https://openjfx.io points here: "JavaFX features a vibrant and passionate developer community. This enthusiasm can be found in the open source mailing list [link to openjfx-dev]." There's nothing anywhere that I can see that states what kind of discussion is and isn't on topic. I will consider posting on StackOverflow but I've had some bad experiences there in the past (overly-zealous anti-spam mechanisms preventing me linking to references, preventing me from answering my own question, etc). -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
Nir is right here but if you could ask your question on StackOverflow I'd be willing to comment on it because I was facing a very similar problem in my projects and I might provide some ideas. Am 11.08.19 um 01:25 schrieb Nir Lisker: I think that this is a better question for StackOverflow. This is a development mailing list. - Nir On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 6:53 PM Mark Raynsford wrote: On 2019-08-06T19:11:42 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: Hello! I realize the subject is somewhat convoluted. I'm putting together something that bears a passing resemblance to a DAW such as Ardour: Given the tumbleweeds and sounds of crickets, I'm guessing that I expressed my question rather poorly. Here's what I'm trying to do: I'm trying to set up a pane with a transform such that I can place objects inside that pane using positions that don't correspond to JavaFX "scene pixels". For example, 1024 units in my coordinate system might correspond to 1 "scene pixel" (is there a better name for the units that JavaFX uses?). However: The objects that are *inside* the objects that I add to the pane want to work in "scene pixels" (for example; Labels seem to want to work in pixel positions when rendering text). Here's a GitHub gist that gives a short example of this: https://gist.github.com/io7m/20b071e11da2dcd96896a43fad6df644 I create one container group (actually a Pane) that adds a transform such that 1 unit == 32 pixels. I add objects to this container. Each object I add has an *external* pane with a size and position specified in units, and an *internal* pane that solely exists to invert the scale of the transform of the *external* pane. Inside this *internal* pane, I can add Labels and so on and these all render correctly. I set up bindings between the transforms so that I can effectively scale and pan the scene by adjusting the transform on the group container. However: Something about this setup seems to be confusing something inside JavaFX; the results I'm seeing onscreen don't seem to match what JavaFX believes the bounds of various objects are. This causes visual issues when I try to do things like set borders on objects, and also seems to confuse ScenicView. Here's a shot with the container group selected (looks correct): https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view0.png Here's a shot with the *external* pane of the bottom object selected: https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view1.png Note that, although the object actually renders onscreen as the right size (one of the pale grey boxes), ScenicView seems to believe that the object's bounds are 1x1: They *are* 1x1, but they're 1x1 when expressed in my custom coordinate system, not in JavaFX "scene pixels". Here's a shot with the *internal* pane of the bottom object selected: https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view2.png This looks correct in the sense that the bounds encompass the label and nothing else. Am I doing something wrong here? I can't tell if I'm basically abusing transforms or not. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
I think that this is a better question for StackOverflow. This is a development mailing list. - Nir On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 6:53 PM Mark Raynsford wrote: > On 2019-08-06T19:11:42 +0100 > Mark Raynsford wrote: > > > Hello! > > > > I realize the subject is somewhat convoluted. I'm putting together > > something that bears a passing resemblance to a DAW such as Ardour: > > Given the tumbleweeds and sounds of crickets, I'm guessing that I > expressed my question rather poorly. > > Here's what I'm trying to do: I'm trying to set up a pane with a > transform such that I can place objects inside that pane using > positions that don't correspond to JavaFX "scene pixels". For example, > 1024 units in my coordinate system might correspond to 1 "scene pixel" > (is there a better name for the units that JavaFX uses?). However: The > objects that are *inside* the objects that I add to the pane want to > work in "scene pixels" (for example; Labels seem to want to work in > pixel positions when rendering text). > > Here's a GitHub gist that gives a short example of this: > > https://gist.github.com/io7m/20b071e11da2dcd96896a43fad6df644 > > I create one container group (actually a Pane) that adds a transform > such that 1 unit == 32 pixels. I add objects to this container. Each > object I add has an *external* pane with a size and position specified > in units, and an *internal* pane that solely exists to invert the scale > of the transform of the *external* pane. Inside this *internal* pane, I > can add Labels and so on and these all render correctly. > > I set up bindings between the transforms so that I can effectively > scale and pan the scene by adjusting the transform on the group > container. However: Something about this setup seems to be confusing > something inside JavaFX; the results I'm seeing onscreen don't seem to > match what JavaFX believes the bounds of various objects are. This > causes visual issues when I try to do things like set borders on > objects, and also seems to confuse ScenicView. > > Here's a shot with the container group selected (looks correct): > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view0.png > > Here's a shot with the *external* pane of the bottom object selected: > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view1.png > > Note that, although the object actually renders onscreen as the right > size (one of the pale grey boxes), ScenicView seems to believe that the > object's bounds are 1x1: They *are* 1x1, but they're 1x1 when expressed > in my custom coordinate system, not in JavaFX "scene pixels". > > Here's a shot with the *internal* pane of the bottom object selected: > > https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view2.png > > This looks correct in the sense that the bounds encompass the label and > nothing else. > > Am I doing something wrong here? I can't tell if I'm basically abusing > transforms or not. > > -- > Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com > >
Re: Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
On 2019-08-06T19:11:42 +0100 Mark Raynsford wrote: > Hello! > > I realize the subject is somewhat convoluted. I'm putting together > something that bears a passing resemblance to a DAW such as Ardour: Given the tumbleweeds and sounds of crickets, I'm guessing that I expressed my question rather poorly. Here's what I'm trying to do: I'm trying to set up a pane with a transform such that I can place objects inside that pane using positions that don't correspond to JavaFX "scene pixels". For example, 1024 units in my coordinate system might correspond to 1 "scene pixel" (is there a better name for the units that JavaFX uses?). However: The objects that are *inside* the objects that I add to the pane want to work in "scene pixels" (for example; Labels seem to want to work in pixel positions when rendering text). Here's a GitHub gist that gives a short example of this: https://gist.github.com/io7m/20b071e11da2dcd96896a43fad6df644 I create one container group (actually a Pane) that adds a transform such that 1 unit == 32 pixels. I add objects to this container. Each object I add has an *external* pane with a size and position specified in units, and an *internal* pane that solely exists to invert the scale of the transform of the *external* pane. Inside this *internal* pane, I can add Labels and so on and these all render correctly. I set up bindings between the transforms so that I can effectively scale and pan the scene by adjusting the transform on the group container. However: Something about this setup seems to be confusing something inside JavaFX; the results I'm seeing onscreen don't seem to match what JavaFX believes the bounds of various objects are. This causes visual issues when I try to do things like set borders on objects, and also seems to confuse ScenicView. Here's a shot with the container group selected (looks correct): https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view0.png Here's a shot with the *external* pane of the bottom object selected: https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view1.png Note that, although the object actually renders onscreen as the right size (one of the pale grey boxes), ScenicView seems to believe that the object's bounds are 1x1: They *are* 1x1, but they're 1x1 when expressed in my custom coordinate system, not in JavaFX "scene pixels". Here's a shot with the *internal* pane of the bottom object selected: https://ataxia.io7m.com/2019/08/10/view2.png This looks correct in the sense that the bounds encompass the label and nothing else. Am I doing something wrong here? I can't tell if I'm basically abusing transforms or not. -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
Concatenating transforms to scale positions but not objects
Hello! I realize the subject is somewhat convoluted. I'm putting together something that bears a passing resemblance to a DAW such as Ardour: https://rekkerd.org/img/201303/ardour3.png Mine doesn't look like that, but the principle is basically the same: I have regions (the blocks containing waveform images above) placed on a timeline. The timeline is scalable on both axes independently; scaling the timeline vertically gives you more space to work with when adjusting automation curves (visible in the "Fader" lane above), and scaling/translating the timeline horizontally allows you to move forwards and backwards in time, and to focus more clearly on a particular region of time. For the sake of simplicity, let's act as if I have just a single timeline instead of the multiple stacked timelines shown in that image. My application expresses the positions of regions on the timeline in terms of "ticks" (small units of time). For the (obviously JavaFX-based) GUI, I'd like to be able to specify a single transform on the timeline view such that I can specify the coordinates of region nodes in terms of ticks and the transform will determine their onscreen pixel positions appropriately. This isn't too hard to do; I can specify an x-axis scale such that 1 pixel = 128 ticks, and I can then specify an x-axis translation in terms of ticks that will be scaled appropriately for the screen. The problem then, however, is that the the nodes within region nodes are also scaled up hugely; if I try to put labels in the regions, the labels will appear 128 times larger than they normally would. :) I want to specify the *positions* of regions in one coordinate system, but work in ordinary "scene pixels" inside those regions. I can't quite work out how to express the transforms I need to JavaFX. I feel like what I need to do is, for each region node, add *another* node inside the node that fills the region entirely, and specify an inverse of the transform applied to the parent region node... If that makes any sense. Is there a sensible way to do what I'm trying to do? [I've developed a 3D renderer, so I'm familiar with how transforms are concatenated using matrices. I don't have an intuitive understanding of how transforms are applied inside JavaFX, and there doesn't appear to be much documentation on this.] -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
