Patches item #3400300, was opened at 2011-08-29 15:08 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by jancsika1 You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478072&aid=3400300...

Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: puredata Group: feature Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 6 Private: No Submitted By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave) Assigned to: Miller Puckette (millerpuckette) Summary: move cord drawing from pd to Tcl procs in pd-gui

Initial Comment: This patch replaces the raw Tcl code in the 'pd' process' C code with two Tcl procs in pdtk_canvas: draw_signal_cord and draw_message_cord. This allows for customization of the cords from GUI plugins and Pd patches. This also is a step in the direction of making the 'pd' --> 'pd-gui' communications Pd messages rather than Tcl code.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Jonathan Wilkes (jancsika1) Date: 2011-08-31 01:59

Message: Oops, I guess "drawing instructions" is an ambiguous term. I just mean the coordinates: startx/y and endx/y. All the other options could be done with a conditional.

BTW-- any reason you are hardcoding a width of "2" in that proc? Shouldn't it be something like -width $::signalcordwidth, with ::signalcordwidth being defined in pd-gui.tcl? (Could also use the options database but that's probably overkill.)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Jonathan Wilkes (jancsika1) Date: 2011-08-30 23:23

Message: I think you just need one proc with an arg corresponding to control/signal. All customization can be done elsewhere by referring to the tags. I can't think of any divergences between messagecord (controlcord?) and signalcord that would require different initial drawing instructions; all future features I can think of-- segmented cords or new cord selection/deletion/edition-- would be handled identically for both cases, no? If you disagree, could you give an example of a way in which a signalcord would ever require different drawing instructions than a controlwire?

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: Hans-Christoph Steiner (eighthave) Date: 2011-08-30 12:36

Message: I think having separate procs/messages for each connection type makes it easier to customize. And its just as easy to add a proc for any new connection type as it is to add a block to a switch or something like that. Given that no new connection types have been added to Pd since its inception, I don't think its a high priority concern.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Comment By: IOhannes m zmölnig (zmoelnig) Date: 2011-08-30 03:09

Message: i haven't had a look yet, but wouldn't it be better to use a single tcl-proc "connect" (or "draw_cords") and specify the type of connection as an argument? this way it can be more easily expanded to other connection types.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478072&aid=3400300...