Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

On 16/03/18 00:30, Derek Kwan wrote: Derek Kwan writes: oliver writes: even if "uniform rendering across systems" is definitely a worthy goal, are the bigger inlets really unavoidable ? no chance to at least hack a personal version of a tcl file to make them thin again ? i for one like th

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

(Changing back to the right subject line). Here's a technical peace offering, separate inlet & outlet height defines: https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/328 In my mind, we could change these defines to canvas variables in the future ala

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

and here a picture showing Pd-extended besides Vanilla 48.1 rolf___ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

it's also that the object box has become smaller and the text more compressed. the attached picture shows the 48.1 box upon the 48.0 box. rolf___ Pd-list@lists.iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> https://lists.puredata.info/listin

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

Derek Kwan writes: > oliver writes: > >> even if "uniform rendering across systems" is definitely a worthy goal, >> are the bigger inlets really unavoidable ? >> >> no chance to at least hack a personal version of a tcl file to make >> them thin again ? >> >> i for one like the slimmer inlets wa

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

oliver writes: > even if "uniform rendering across systems" is definitely a worthy goal, > are the bigger inlets really unavoidable ? > > no chance to at least hack a personal version of a tcl file to make > them thin again ? > > i for one like the slimmer inlets way better. I suppose I'm in

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

my problem with the update, as expressed in that pull request discussion, is that letters like "g", "p", "y" have less room and kinda touch outlets. I guess in order to avoid it we'd need the object to have another pixel of room at the bottom. But other than that, I like the new design 2018-03-15

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

It got in with this merged Pull Request https://github.com/pure-data/pure-data/pull/227 2018-03-15 16:10 GMT-03:00 Miller Puckette : > I'm unaware inlet/outlets grew... I'll have a look and see what's up. I > don't think there's any reason for them to have chanced. > > cheers > Miller > > On Thu

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

I'm unaware inlet/outlets grew... I'll have a look and see what's up. I don't think there's any reason for them to have chanced. cheers Miller On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 02:15:03PM -0300, Alexandre Torres Porres wrote: > What's hard on my eyes so bad that hurts down to my soul is the *BOLD* font >

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

What's hard on my eyes so bad that hurts down to my soul is the *BOLD* font as a default, specially for texts like in this image you sent. But I really can't see/feel any issue with this change. 2018-03-15 11:22 GMT-03:00 oliver : > > has really nobody else experienced this ? > yup > is this j

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

Antoine Rousseau wrote: moreover, I think Dan took inlet/outlet's height back from pd-extended's one, allowing (in a possible future) to draw control/signal differently, as it was on pd-extended: "empty" signal inlet/outlet. yeah, definitely looks very "extended-ish" even if "uniform renderin

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

font is now DejaVu Sans Mono. > > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 15. März 2018 um 16:10 Uhr > > Von: oliver > > An: "pd-l...@mail.iem.at" > > Betreff: Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ... > > > > Liam Goodacre wrote: > > > I had noticed t

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1

I notice something similar on Mac, maybe not as drastic as on Windows, however, personally i also favor the old, thinner style. jayrope - - - www.jayrope.com www.aircushionfinish.com www.ello.co/jayrope On 15 Mar 2018, at 15:23, pd-list-requ...@lists.iem.at wrote: > has really nobody else exp

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

treff: Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ... > > Liam Goodacre wrote: > > I had noticed this too, and also find it mildly irritating. > > > > I think that the oversized outlets existed on Windows before 0.48. > > i joined PD vanilla with version 0.46 and i

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

Liam Goodacre wrote: I had noticed this too, and also find it mildly irritating. I think that the oversized outlets existed on Windows before 0.48. i joined PD vanilla with version 0.46 and i'm pretty sure they didn't. at least not on my machine(s). (my screenshots show the difference between

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ... Hey Oliver, remember that you can also "stretch" objects, that might be helpful. cheers On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:22 PM, oliver mailto:oli...@klingt.org>> wrote: > hi, this is on windows 7 / 64bit, PD 0.48.1 after upda

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

Hey Oliver, remember that you can also "stretch" objects, that might be helpful. cheers On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 2:22 PM, oliver wrote: > > hi, > >> >> this is on windows 7 / 64bit, PD 0.48.1 >> >> >> >> after updating from 0.48.0 to 0.48.1, the thickness of all object >> and me

Re: [PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

2018-03-15 8:24 GMT-03:00 oliver : > hi, > > this is on windows 7 / 64bit, PD 0.48.1 > > > > after updating from 0.48.0 to 0.48.1, the thickness of all object and > message inlets/outlets has increased by 1 pixel (see attached image). > > this may not sound like much, but when opening heavy patche

[PD] bigger inlet/outlet size in 0.48.1 ...

hi, this is on windows 7 / 64bit, PD 0.48.1 after updating from 0.48.0 to 0.48.1, the thickness of all object and message inlets/outlets has increased by 1 pixel (see attached image). this may not sound like much, but when opening heavy patches it gets very irritating on the eye. is there