Bugs item #1678373, was opened at 2007-03-11 17:31 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by zmoelnig You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478070&aid=1678373...

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: v0.40.2 Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Matteo Sisti Sette (sistisette) Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody) Summary: GUI elements depth error

Initial Comment: When two gui elements (for example sliders) overlap, and you try to "click" on them (i.e. move the slider) within the overlapping region, the correct behaviour would be that the front-most element "receive" the mouse click, since that is the one you're visibly "clicking on". However, the opposite happens: the gui element which is behind is the one that you move. This happens both in editmode and not.

At least on Windows XP.

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

Comment By: IOhannes m zmölnig (zmoelnig)

Date: 2007-10-16 15:21

Message: Logged In: YES user_id=564396 Originator: NO

as ed kelly has demonstrated so beautifully at the pd~con07, this is really a feature and not a bug: it gives you the possibility to add hidden guiobjects that control the behaviour of the visible ones. e.g. you can create a symbol-box where you can select the symbols by click-n-drag (just like you are used to do it with numberboxes)

see attached patch for examples File Added: backguis-rule.pd

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

Comment By: Luke Iannini (lukeiannini) Date: 2007-07-02 01:06

Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1541432 Originator: NO

Hi, I tried tried to make a slider-based virtual clavier and this bug kept all of the black keys from working. The workaround would have been to surround the black keys with 3 white sliders of various sizes, then cover discontinuities with a 1-pixel white canvas, all to ensure a single-layer of GUI elements. I definitely said the hell with it. So I agree it's terribly annoying! Maybe I'll have a look at the source sometime, but it would be a miracle if I found it.

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

Comment By: Matteo Sisti Sette (sistisette) Date: 2007-03-14 21:25

Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1709568 Originator: YES

Isn't it intended to let access GUI elements which are on the bottom of stack, thus taking them to the top (in rotation)? Because if

The bottom element is not taken to the top. It remains on the bottom, and it keeps receiving the events; the front-most element never receives the event. Furthermore, I am concerned especially about non-edit mode, and I don't think that anything should rotate when not editing.

Have a look at the attached patch (depth_bug.pd). By the way, sorry for not attaching an example before.

It just makes no sense that you are clicking on what is hidden rather than on what is visible. File Added: depth_bug.pd

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

Comment By: inn0c (inn0c) Date: 2007-03-14 11:09

Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1493916 Originator: NO

However, the opposite happens: the gui element which is behind is the

one that you move.

Isn't it intended to let access GUI elements which are on the bottom of stack, thus taking them to the top (in rotation)? Because if

the correct behaviour was that the front-most element "receive" the

mouse click

then the front-most element would be the only one that receives while the others stayed intact.

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

You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=478070&aid=1678373...