search

robinsedlaczek / ForceFeedbackProgramming

18 stars 6 forks source link

Frame height varies depending on visible part of method #45

Closed ralfw closed 5 years ago

ralfw commented 8 years ago

When only a single line is visible, the frame just covers it:

bildschirmfoto 2016-07-01 um 20 33 07

As soon as more lines become visible by horizontal scrolling the frame increases in size and covers them all:

bildschirmfoto 2016-07-01 um 20 33 29
BADF00D commented 8 years ago

Hi, I just investigated the problem, but I'm not sure about the expected behavior. So I made some screenshots to discuss about possible solutions:

  1. A frame that only surrounds the content of a method: framesurroundscontentonly Each method yields (depending on its content) in a different frame width.
  2. A frame that start at the most left character from the method and goes to the most right (in this second example there is a really long line outside the viewport): framefromfirstcharacterstorichtofscreen Because there are really long line in the invisible part of the method, the frame has a huge width.
  3. A frame that goes straight from left to right of the screen. framefromlefttoright Independent of the content, all frame fill the complete viewport.

I prefer the third solution. I think this would yield to the most consistent look, because each frame has the same width (full witdh of the viewport), instead of each frame with a different with depending on its content.

ralfw commented 8 years ago

Thx for contrasting the different ways of drawing a frame. I guess I too like version 3 best :-) And it should be the simplest to actually generate.

BADF00D commented 8 years ago

Yes, it is.

ralfw commented 8 years ago

Looking fwd to your pull request 😊

matt-inteltech commented 5 years ago

Hello, Ralf. Do you want me to code for 3rd solution of BADF00D?

ralfw commented 5 years ago

No. This issue still is in the Backlog column of the board. Please only pull from the Ready column.

ralfw commented 5 years ago

@matt-inteltech When I look at the screenshot you posted with your comment on #58 I guess I see that @BADF00D's 3. solution has already been implemented. That's good to know. No further action required.