This is the bug/patch tracker for Rockbox. Click here for more information.
Quick links: Bugs · Patches · Rockbox frontpage
FS#9904 - Fix for FS#9894 - Position of the progress bar is not updated after the font is changed
Attached to Project:
Rockbox
Opened by Alexander Levin (fml2) - Friday, 13 February 2009, 20:45 GMT+2
Last edited by Thomas Martitz (kugel.) - Monday, 16 February 2009, 09:37 GMT+2
Opened by Alexander Levin (fml2) - Friday, 13 February 2009, 20:45 GMT+2
Last edited by Thomas Martitz (kugel.) - Monday, 16 February 2009, 09:37 GMT+2
|
DetailsThis is a fix for the bug reported in
|
This task depends upon
Closed by Thomas Martitz (kugel.)
Monday, 16 February 2009, 09:37 GMT+2
Reason for closing: Accepted
Additional comments about closing: Committed slightly modified in r20015, thanks you!
Monday, 16 February 2009, 09:37 GMT+2
Reason for closing: Accepted
Additional comments about closing: Committed slightly modified in r20015, thanks you!
But if the information about the font is present in the wps viewport it can be used as the parameter as well, it would be even better.
The local variable I used for vieports[v] should make binsize smaller. But I agree that it could/should be a separate patch.
Right, I forget about the draw-in-the-middle-of-the-line thing.
Regarding the parameters of draw_progressbar: if we pass the wps_viewport, we don't need to pass the progress bar explicitly since it's contained in the viewport struct. Thus the function gets the meaning "draw the viewport's progressbar given the specified gwps state".
>> "I'd still prefer to preserve the information about whether it was explicitly set or not as long as possible. I even wanted to introduce a special flag for that but then went the "dirty" way by using a special value range.
>> Effectively 0 would give the same result, yes. But to have this info is cleaner IMO (for possible changes in the future)."
a) We don't code for the future. Nobody can tell what will happen in the future, so we do not prepare the code for it. Especially not, if there's not even the slightest idea of "what might change".
b) I don't consider more complexity as cleaner. It does what we need, not more, with minimal complexity. That is what I consider as clean.
I'm going to commit your version, but with my parameter change.