It’s not so much that adding a single dummy view wrecks us. Our cell layout
has a lot going on, with a fair amount of variable spacing and multiple views
often being hidden and swapped out. The UIStackView scrolling performance slog
I’m seeing is just sum of all that.
Sigh, oh well. I guess
> On 7 Jul 2016, at 04:37, Daniel Stenmark wrote:
>
> What’s the best way to achieve variable spacing between children of a
> UIStackView? I know that a popular approach is to add an empty dummy view to
> act as padding, but this is being used in a UITableView cell, so scrolling
> performanc
No, adding additional horizontal or vertical spacing constraints to the
UIStackView’s arranged subviews results in conflicts with UIStackView's
implicit constraints.
Dan
On Jul 6, 2016, at 3:52 PM, Quincey Morris
mailto:quinceymor...@rivergatesoftware.com>>
wrote:
On Jul 6, 2016, at 15:41 ,
On Jul 6, 2016, at 15:41 , Daniel Stenmark wrote:
>
> This would require my UIStackView’s children to have children of their own,
> which just means even more layout constraints to resolve at scroll-time.
Can’t you set constraints between the stack view children and/or the parent? I
thought
This would require my UIStackView’s children to have children of their own,
which just means even more layout constraints to resolve at scroll-time.
Dan
On Jul 6, 2016, at 3:34 PM, Quincey Morris
mailto:quinceymor...@rivergatesoftware.com>>
wrote:
On Jul 6, 2016, at 13:37 , Daniel Stenmark
m
On Jul 6, 2016, at 13:37 , Daniel Stenmark wrote:
>
> What’s the best way to achieve variable spacing between children of a
> UIStackView?
I’ve had success placing leading/trailing/top/bottom constraints on the child
view, or on components within the child view, to siblings or parent as
appro
What’s the best way to achieve variable spacing between children of a
UIStackView? I know that a popular approach is to add an empty dummy view to
act as padding, but this is being used in a UITableView cell, so scrolling
performance is critical and the implicit constraints created by adding a
On 6 Jul 2016, at 18:01, Quincey Morris
wrote:
> On Jul 6, 2016, at 03:06 , Jonathan Taylor
> wrote:
>>
>> a single lost frame will be fairly catastrophic for the scientific experiment
>
> If this is genuinely your scenario, then nothing mentioned in this thread is
> going to satisfy your re
> On Jul 6, 2016, at 3:06 AM, Jonathan Taylor
> wrote:
>
> I should also clarify that (in spite of my other email thread running in
> parallel to this) I am not doing any complex encoding of the data being
> streamed to disk - these are just basic TIFF images and metadata.
Since you said pre
On Jul 6, 2016, at 03:06 , Jonathan Taylor
wrote:
>
> a single lost frame will be fairly catastrophic for the scientific experiment
If this is genuinely your scenario, then nothing mentioned in this thread is
going to satisfy your requirements. It is pure whimsy to expect any
prioritization m
On 6 Jul 2016, at 11:06, Jonathan Taylor wrote:
>
> Hopefully my detail above explains why I really do not want to drop frames
> and/or use a ring buffer. Effectively I have a buffer pool, but if I exhaust
> the buffer pool then (a) something is going badly wrong, and (b) I prefer to
> expand
Thanks for your reply Alastair. Definitely interested in thinking about your
suggestions - some responses below that will hopefully help clarify:
> The first thing to state is that you *can’t* write code of this type with the
> attitude that “dropping frames is not an option”. Fundamentally, th
On 5 Jul 2016, at 13:36, Jonathan Taylor wrote:
>
> This is a long shot, but I thought I would ask in case an API exists to do
> what I want. One of the roles of my code is to record video to disk as it is
> received from a camera. A magnetic hard disk can normally keep up with this,
> but if
13 matches
Mail list logo
