Jonathan Gordon schrieb:
> 2009/10/28 Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz_at_student.htw-berlin.de>:
>> Why? _set_defaults doesn't, and won't, need to know what screen it's called
>> from. It returns the UI vp (which is in fact default viewport for the whole
>> UI excluding skins), or returns _set_fullscreen if no UI viewport is
>> specified. The caller needs to know that (and it obviously does), and then
>> decides for _set_defaults() or _set_fullscreen().
> You just said excluding!!!! Therefore something has to know what it wants back..
The caller, yes.
> If we agree that _fullscreen() should return the whole display (which
> means sbs is disabled) , and set_defaults() should return the ui area,
> then when the skin_parser starts parsing (i.e before it sees any %we
> or %wd tags) the default viewport should be setup with a call to
fullscreen (maybe renamed) should do what it does now, IMO. I fail to
see the point of having a function that respects the classic sb but not
the custom sb. Where would the be useful? You surely want to either be
ultimately fullscreen (0,0,LCD_WIDTH,LCD_HEIGHT), or let background
> It should only fix that to calling fullscreen() when a %wd tag is found.
> Now, how does set_defaults() know that its being called by a skin or
> by the lists? it doesnt, and shouldnt... it should be returning the
> same viewport for both, i.e the one from the setting. therefor makeing
> %Vi redundant and unused.
That's what set_defaults() does. Yet I'm skeptical about calling it from
the WPS. The WPS should really be as fullscreen as possible (i.e. so
that it just doesn't draw over the sbs/classic statusbar) since it
doesn't draw any list and the UI vp doesn't make any sense due to the
customizability. That's what _set_fullscreen() achieves.
> I *will* accept that %Vi can be used as a hint to themers as a way to
> say where it is safe to put the ui or other stuff in other skins, but
> in that case a comment would do it better.
It's not simply a hint.
Received on 2009-10-28