[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-edu-devel
Subject:    [kde-edu-devel] Re: additions to kgeo and kig
From:       Maurizio Paolini <paolini () dmf ! bs ! unicatt ! it>
Date:       2002-07-10 10:50:50
[Download RAW message or body]

> Subject: Re: additions to kgeo and kig
> From: Dominique Devriese <fritmebufstek@pandora.be>
>
>
> I'm working on some things to support this properly ( "invalid"
> objects etc. This is necessary cause it's possible for a circle and a
> line to have no intersection... )

Yeah, that's the point.  Somehow I did not see a perfect way to solve 
the problem.  One way, is (as you say) to add an "invalid" marking, 
which would of course invalidate all child objects...
Another way is to "define" the intersection point anyway (that is actually
what I did in kgeo), which is much more simple, even if not completely
correct.  The point is if it is nice or not to see parts of the graphics
"disappear" when you move things in an "invalid" position.

Don't know what is best, actually.

bye,

Maurizio Paolini
_______________________________________________
kde-edu-devel mailing list
kde-edu-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-edu-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]