Just a thought...

[Gary Chambers-4]

It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A "fuzz/blur"
effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such things.

Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
performance penalties.

Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to a
bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)).
Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too
useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.

Anyway, just a few thoughts.

Gary.

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Michael van der Gulik-2]

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...> wrote:

It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A "fuzz/blur"
effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such things.

Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
performance penalties.

Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to a
bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)).
Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too
useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.

If you were to implement some more interesting effects in BitBLT, how would you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?

Gulik


--
http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Igor Stasenko]

2008/4/18 Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg@...>:

>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...>
> wrote:
> > It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A
> "fuzz/blur"
> > effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such
> things.
> >
> > Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
> > performance penalties.
> >
> > Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to
> a
> > bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)).
> > Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too
> > useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.
> >
>
>
> If you were to implement some more interesting effects in BitBLT, how would
> you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other
> targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?
>

1. BitBlt already contains many blitting rules which is problematic to
support on different back ends.
2. In future, i suppose, we need a more functional approach how to
define drawing operations.
To describe a blitting/drawing operations with classes/objects not
with integer numbers, like we currently have, which is meaningless and
hard to determine how they working.

Drawing operation should be represented by object -  a
function(source, destination, arguments..), where function is fully
reflected in language.

> Gulik
>
>
> --
> http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
> _______________________________________________
>  UI mailing list
>  UI@...
>  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Gary Chambers-4]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ui-bounces@...
> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Igor Stasenko
> Sent: 18 April 2008 7:32 AM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Just a thought...
>
>
> 2008/4/18 Michael van der Gulik <mikevdg@...>:
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers
> <gazzaguru2@...>
> > wrote:
> > > It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A
> > "fuzz/blur"
> > > effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such
> > things.
> > >
> > > Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
> > > performance penalties.
> > >
> > > Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind
> canvas (leading to
> > a
> > > bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage...
> #drawTranslucentImage...)).
> > > Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a
> choke-point that is too
> > > useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.
> > >
> >
> >
> > If you were to implement some more interesting effects in
> BitBLT, how would
> > you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other
> > targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?
> >

Would need to have fallback options for backends that do not directly support any new features.
Sig, below, seems on the right track in terms of refactoring.

> 1. BitBlt already contains many blitting rules which is problematic to
> support on different back ends.
> 2. In future, i suppose, we need a more functional approach how to
> define drawing operations.
> To describe a blitting/drawing operations with classes/objects not
> with integer numbers, like we currently have, which is meaningless and
> hard to determine how they working.
>
> Drawing operation should be represented by object -  a
> function(source, destination, arguments..), where function is fully
> reflected in language.
>

Agree about the operation being properly represented *but* still need the extra performance of a backend (primitive) operation. People are complaining enough that Morhpic is slow...

>
> > Gulik
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
> > http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> >  UI mailing list
> >  UI@...
> >  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> UI@...
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Gary Chambers-4]

Backwards compatability is always an issue, especially here. Wondering if we can really move things onwards now...

-----Original Message-----
From: ui-bounces@... [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Michael van der Gulik
Sent: 18 April 2008 4:44 AM
To: Squeak's User Interface
Subject: Re: [UI] Just a thought...

On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...> wrote:

It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A "fuzz/blur"
effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such things.

Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
performance penalties.

Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to a
bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)).
Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too
useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.

If you were to implement some more interesting effects in BitBLT, how would you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?

Gulik


--
http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
http://gulik.pbwiki.com/

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Igor Stasenko]

i just discovered something which may be of you interest :)
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3269
See 'melt' filter. I think you can use it for smearing background

2008/4/19 Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...>:

>
>
> Backwards compatability is always an issue, especially here. Wondering if we
> can really move things onwards now...
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ui-bounces@...
> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Michael van der
> Gulik
> Sent: 18 April 2008 4:44 AM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Just a thought...
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...>
> wrote:
>
> > It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A
> "fuzz/blur"
> > effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such
> things.
> >
> > Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
> > performance penalties.
> >
> > Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind canvas (leading to
> a
> > bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage... #drawTranslucentImage...)).
> > Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a choke-point that is too
> > useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.
> >
>
>
> If you were to implement some more interesting effects in BitBLT, how would
> you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other
> targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?
>
> Gulik
>
>
> --
> http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
> http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
> _______________________________________________
>  UI mailing list
>  UI@...
>  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>
>

--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui

[Gary Chambers-4]

Sorry Sig, thought I'd replied to this...

Appears to be juan's old work...
Looks a bit heavyweight and not addressing translucency blending into a "destination".

Won't worry about it for now, FuzzyLabelMorph will do. :-)

Regards,
Gary

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ui-bounces@...
> [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of Igor Stasenko
> Sent: 24 April 2008 11:18 PM
> To: Squeak's User Interface
> Subject: Re: [UI] Just a thought...
>
>
> i just discovered something which may be of you interest :)
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3269
> See 'melt' filter. I think you can use it for smearing background
>
> 2008/4/19 Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@...>:
> >
> >
> > Backwards compatability is always an issue, especially here.
> Wondering if we
> > can really move things onwards now...
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ui-bounces@...
> > [mailto:ui-bounces@...]On Behalf Of
> Michael van der
> > Gulik
> > Sent: 18 April 2008 4:44 AM
> > To: Squeak's User Interface
> > Subject: Re: [UI] Just a thought...
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 5:15 AM, Gary Chambers
> <gazzaguru2@...>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > It might be nice that we have some more paint rules in BitBlt. A
> > "fuzz/blur"
> > > effect would be nice and take the load off the Squeak code for such
> > things.
> > >
> > > Just wanting to get more contemporary with the ui look without large
> > > performance penalties.
> > >
> > > Not quite liking the way that effects are hidden behind
> canvas (leading to
> > a
> > > bloated interface, perhaps (c.f. #drawImage...
> #drawTranslucentImage...)).
> > > Not sure where the balance should be. Looks like a
> choke-point that is too
> > > useful to bypass on a case-by-case basis.
> > >
> >
> >
> > If you were to implement some more interesting effects in
> BitBLT, how would
> > you make sure that Morphs that use this code will still work on other
> > targets such as Rome, Postscript Canvases, VNC etc?
> >
> > Gulik
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
> > http://gulik.pbwiki.com/
> > _______________________________________________
> >  UI mailing list
> >  UI@...
> >  http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
> _______________________________________________
> UI mailing list
> UI@...
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui
>

_______________________________________________
UI mailing list
UI@...
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ui