[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #5 on issue 161 by allain.lalonde: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 We've tried as much as possible to cause no breaking changes while fixing bugs, but... the fix to Issue 155 has obviously done so. With hindsight, implementing any change to the way PNode computes its full bounds is an error in a point release since no matter what there's a change it'll break client code. Unless there are objections, I'm going to rollback the change for Issue 155, reopen it and mark it for inclusion in 2.0 since it's a breaking change. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #6 on issue 161 by re...@colorado.edu: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 I agree with the recommendation in Comment 5 to roll back the fix for issue 155 for the 1.3 release. Should we plan on a 1.3rc3 for this? Also, I think we should discuss the proposed semantics in Comment 4 for inclusion in 2.0; let me know if that warrants a separate ticket, or should be subsumed by issue 155 or other tickets. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #7 on issue 161 by allain.lalonde: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 Regarding comment 4... I'd be OK with that approach, but I think that it ought to be the exception rather than the rule. Children classes who wish to abstain from full bounds computations should override the appropriate methods. Maybe even composite only. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] [piccolo2d] r970 committed - Reverting r923 since it was a breaking change. It will need to be redo...
Revision: 970
Author: allain.lalonde
Date: Tue Feb 9 07:58:01 2010
Log: Reverting r923 since it was a breaking change. It will need to be
redone in 2.0. Seems that some apps were making use of this behaviour.
http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/source/detail?r=970
Modified:
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/main/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBounds.java
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/test/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBoundsTest.java
===
---
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/main/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBounds.java
Mon Jan 18 16:07:38 2010
+++
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/main/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBounds.java
Tue Feb 9 07:58:01 2010
@@ -233,7 +233,10 @@
* @param bounds bounds being added
*/
public void add(final PBounds bounds) {
-if (isEmpty) {
+if (bounds.isEmpty) {
+return;
+}
+else if (isEmpty) {
x = bounds.x;
y = bounds.y;
width = bounds.width;
===
---
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/test/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBoundsTest.java
Mon Jan 18 16:07:38 2010
+++
/piccolo2d.java/trunk/core/src/test/java/edu/umd/cs/piccolo/util/PBoundsTest.java
Tue Feb 9 07:58:01 2010
@@ -31,7 +31,6 @@
import java.awt.geom.Rectangle2D;
import junit.framework.TestCase;
-import edu.umd.cs.piccolo.PNode;
import edu.umd.cs.piccolo.PiccoloAsserts;
/**
@@ -82,10 +81,11 @@
PiccoloAsserts.assertEquals(new PDimension(10, 10), b.getSize(),
0.1);
}
-public void testWhenBoundsHas0HeightFullBoundsIsCorrectlyReturned() {
-final PNode node = new PNode();
-final PBounds testBounds = new PBounds(10, 10, 10, 0);
-node.setBounds(testBounds);
-assertEquals(testBounds, node.getFullBounds());
-}
-}
+// TODO: This test should pass, but making it do so would break binary
compatability
+/*
+ * public void testWhenBoundsHas0HeightFullBoundsIsCorrectlyReturned()
{
+ * final PNode node = new PNode(); final PBounds testBounds = new
+ * PBounds(10, 10, 10, 0); node.setBounds(testBounds);
+ * assertEquals(testBounds, node.getFullBounds()); }
+ */
+}
--
Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 155 in piccolo2d: If width or height is zero, the rest of bounds are reset.
Updates: Status: Accepted Labels: Milestone-2.0 Comment #5 on issue 155 by allain.lalonde: If width or height is zero, the rest of bounds are reset. http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=155 This Issue will be resolved in 2.0. No binary incompatible changes are allowed until 2.0. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #9 on issue 161 by heue...@gmail.com: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 Any of us can change our votes on 1.3-rc2 if necessary. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #10 on issue 161 by cmal...@pixelzoom.com: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 Btw... Just for the record, we've found a second PhET application broken by this change. And there are probably others that we haven't noticed yet, since the breakage is sometimes subtle. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #11 on issue 161 by allain.lalonde: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 I've reverted and re-opened. Regarding the rc, technically yes we should re-vote. Since this is the only change, if things run off the trunk, it might just mean more work for Michael. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Release Piccolo2D.Java 1.3
I'm re-voting, based on our discussion in issue 161. --- [ ] +1 I support this release [ ] +0 [ ] -0 [ X] -1 I oppose this release because (as described in issue 161) full bounds behavior was changed by fixing issue 155. -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 161 in piccolo2d: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3
Comment #13 on issue 161 by heue...@gmail.com: full bounds behavior has changed in Piccolo 1.3 http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=161 I don't mind putting out new RCs, it's better late than never. Binding votes are those from project committers. Non-binding votes are those from non-committers. A -1 non-binding vote does not necessarily block a release, although it would be inconsiderate to do so. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
[piccolo2d-dev] Re: Issue 162 in piccolo2d: Improve semantics for full bounds computation
Comment #1 on issue 162 by re...@colorado.edu: Improve semantics for full bounds computation http://code.google.com/p/piccolo2d/issues/detail?id=162 Allain said [in comment 7 of issue 161]: Regarding [the above proposal]... I'd be OK with that approach, but I think that it ought to be the exception rather than the rule. Children classes who wish to abstain from full bounds computations should override the appropriate methods. Maybe even composite only. -- You received this message because you are listed in the owner or CC fields of this issue, or because you starred this issue. You may adjust your issue notification preferences at: http://code.google.com/hosting/settings -- Piccolo2D Developers Group: http://groups.google.com/group/piccolo2d-dev?hl=en
