On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Daniel Stone <dan...@fooishbar.org> wrote:
> Hi, > > On 2 May 2013 15:42, Jason Ekstrand <ja...@jlekstrand.net> wrote: > > Ok, I see it now. Sorry, but I missed it on my first read-through. Yes, > it > > fixes the problem, but in an extremely confusing way. The reason I say > it > > is confusing is because it inherently mixes buffer and surface coordinate > > systems. I really think we need to isolate buffer coordinates from > surface > > coordinates more. Perhaps what we need is two requests: set_source_rect > and > > set_dest_rect and completely ignore the x and y from attach. This both > > provides clarity to the coordinate systems and provides a little > separation > > between crop and scale. > > Ideally, when wl_surface::commit was added, wl_surface::attach > should've been broken out into wl_surface::attach and > wl_surface::set_position. Oh well. > Exactly. That's what my suggestion was trying to fix (at least in the transformed surface case). > That being said, we can't ignore the x and y from attach, because that > _moves the window_ on screen (think resizing from top left), whereas > this is all about how we map the contents of a buffer into that window > - totally unrelated to moving. > Yes, I realize that the x and y from attach are used for moving or scaling from top or left. My suggestion was to replace the x and y in attach with an x and y in set_dest_rect. We wouldn't be losing functionality, just moving it in a certain case. This way surface coordinates are kept with surfaces and buffer coordinates are kept with buffers. In this case, the defined behavior would be that if you create a scaler for a surface, the x and y in attach are disabled and set_dest_rect takes over. This way older clients can just use attach like they used to and clients that use surface scalers use the destination rectangle. It's not a perfect fix, but I think it moves in the right direction. And, for what it's worth, it doesn't make things significantly more complicated because anything that's going to scale from the top-left will have to mess with both the surface and the scaler anyway. --Jason Ekstrand
_______________________________________________ wayland-devel mailing list wayland-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/wayland-devel
