[GEM-dev] Offscreen naming poll!

[B. Bogart]

> B. Bogart wrote:
>> gembuffer ?
>> gembuf? (gemwin)
>>
>> james tittle wrote:
>>
>>> name it, and where it should go in the folder hierarchy?   Currently
>>> it's named [gemframebuffer], but really I think  [gemoffscreen] would
>>> be
>
> as you state correctly, the name [gembuffer] would be coherent with  the
> name [gemwindow], so the functionality should be coherent too. (imo, the
> same goes for [gemframebuffer] and [gemoffscreen].)
> i foresee nameclashes with the multiple_windows (whenever they will
> come...)
>
>>>
>>> ...also, on my harddrive I put it in src/controls (it would be
>>> inserted
>>> into a gemchain after [gemhead]), but I guess it could also  go in
>>> src/manips, or even src/Nongeos?
>
> could it be an option to make an alternative(!) [gemhead] out of this
> object?.
> so people could decide whether an entire gemchain is onscreen
> ([gemhead]) or offscreen ([???]).
> if so, i would vote for something really clumsy like [gemhead_os]
> ("clumsy" since i cannot think of a better name, not because the object
> _should_ be named clumsy of course)

How about putting that functionality into gemhead:

[gemhead 1] (render pri 1, onscreen)
[gemhead 1 mybuffer] (pri 1, render to buffer named mybuffer)


Could be easy to test debugging by removing the one argument (or setting
the message)

Actually this (ui wise) would work for multiple windows too,

[gemhead 1 mywindow] Then its transparent to the user if its a named
window [gemwin 30 mywindow] or a named buffer....

Just thinking aloud.

b.


> mfg.ads.r
> IOhannes
>
> _______________________________________________
> GEM-dev mailing list
> GEM-dev at iem.at
> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
>