Closed head-gardener closed 2 months ago
cc @danth @trueNAHO
Hmm, the only difference between the existing code snippet and pixel
is that the former produces a 1920×1080 image, whereas the latter produces a 1×1 image. These should appear the same when used as a wallpaper, unless the single pixel causes issues with scaling (since it has a 1:1 aspect ratio). Perhaps we should consider removing the existing example entirely?
Perhaps we should consider removing the existing example entirely?
I agree. Since the snippet was written by a person who didn't know the function was there it seems redundant. I'm not an expert on image manipulation stuff and can't comment on how well the function works, but I'll ask around.
If you like, we can merge this as-is and look at removing the redundant example later.
If you like, we can merge this as-is and look at removing the redundant example later.
Yes, I think that would be better.
P.S. Was little busy today.
The function implements a fairly popular feature and is pretty old, but never gets mentioned in the docs. In fact, I only found it by randomly going through the sources. As a result, a person I spoke to wrote the section above describing a re-implementation of the function, which does work but doesn't need to be the default approach.
This change will improve discoverability of the codebase and direct users to a more standardized implementation.
P.S.
base16-schemes
changedcatppuccin.yaml
to a couple of variant themes, which is represented in this commit.