From: Alan (alan-boost_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-20 23:02:12
* Aaron W. LaFramboise <aaronrabiddog51_at_[hidden]> [2004-12-16 23:18]:
> Andy Little wrote:
> > "John Torjo" <john.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote
> >>As a side-node, I'm moderately against having float coordinates. Why would
> >>you think int is not enough?
> > A more complete framework would have UDT's rather than ints, representing
> > pixels, as well as other types representing inches, millimetres as used in
> > (say) CSS and (I think) SVG etc, which would allow automatic conversion
> > (runtime for pixels) of one measure to another. It would also allow precise
> > control over the semantics of converting.
> I think the decision on the representation of coordinates is an
> extremely important one--one that might doom a library to ultimate
> obsoletion if decided wrongly. As Boost is meant to be a model of _the
> C++ way_, future libraries may also be inclined to specify in the manner
> Boost does. It's very important to remain forward-looking, thinking
> not, "What sort of pixel representation do today's GUIs use?" but rather
> "Will tomorrow's GUI be based on pixels?"
What about todays printer? Is that based on pixels?
If I were to go to the trouble to create an GUI that rendered
diagrams, I'd probably to to the touble to print those diagrams.
I'd like to use the same algorithm to render to the screen and
to the printer, simply swap out the device context.
-- Alan Gutierrez - alan_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk