dillon@CORY.BERKELEY.EDU.UUCP (05/01/87)
I Admit IT!! I've Been HAcking!!! I've been trying to setup a custombitmap'd custom screen, using a bitmap larger than the view port. This part works fine. ..I was hoping to be able to make a 'virtual workbench'... along the lines of MWB, but allowing for 'virtual' screens much larger than the viewport size (e.g. 960x960 BitMap when the actual viewport is only 702 x 330 or something)... and then allow the user to 'paw around' in this virtual screen. However, I've run into some problems... I can move the viewport's window on the screen around no problem (Ala MakeScreen/RethingDisplay), but Intuition doesn't handle it right: (A) Intuition doesn't offset the mouse coordinates properly When your viewport origin is something other than the upper left hand corner of the bitmap. (B) Intuition doesn't allow you to move windows past the viewport border (702), even though the bitmap might be 900 across. I have been unable to find what Intuition uses to check that a delta move stays within bounds... I've tried Everything! All the screen BitMap's and RastPort's seem to be geared to the extra large custom bitmap. I can't figure out where Intuition is getting the 702 from (I've even tried changing the Screen->Width after openning!!!). Both (A) and (B) Would be a *real* simple fix for 1.3.... Intuition need simply check the RxOffset and RyOffset in the RasInfo structure, and use the BitMap for bounds checking valid window positions. Can somebody at C-A help? If not with a solution, how'bout with a description of what Intuition is *actually* doing??? You've got to admit, it's appealing to be able to shove your windows all the way off your screen! Help Help Help Help... Thanks, -Matt (BTW I wanted to surprise you all with this one... <sigh>...oh well)
hadeishi@husc7.UUCP (05/01/87)
Re: Intuition ignoring Rx, RyOffset in RasInfo Yes, I've encountered this problem too, and I've complained about it to CATS already (about a month ago). I think this is a serious limitation of Intuition, and basically renders it USELESS in any application that uses the hardware to scroll around in a screen (what seems to me a very natural application of the hardware). In fact, this would be massively useful for portability questions; i.e., programs that require 1024x1024 screens could open up a superbitmap screen and then the user could simply scroll around in the screen with some kind of movable gadget. Thus programs that use newer hardware could have a chance to run normally on the old hardware. At least the user could attempt to see what it might be like to run on the newer (1024x1024 or some such) hardware by scrolling around in the older Amigas (which would also tend to encourage people to buy the new hardware). 1024x1024 applications could be developed, all sorts of neat things could happen. What about it, CATS? Can this be fixed? -Mitsu
miner@ulowell.cs.ulowell.edu (Rich A Miner ) (05/14/87)
In article <1817@husc6.UUCP> hadeishi@husc7.UUCP (Mitsuharu Hadeishi) writes: > i.e., programs that require 1024x1024 screens could open up a superbitmap >screen and then the user could simply scroll around in the screen with >some kind of movable gadget. I think this is a great idea and mentioned it to R.J. Mical when he gave his talk in the Boston area. Even just for the intuition screen it would be nice to have a superbitmap to move around in. I do not think you need any special scroll gadgets either. We had a Tektronics SmallTalk workstation here that had a virtual 1024x1024 screen on a physical 640x400 display. It felt very comfortable, as you moved the mouse to the edge the physical screen it would scroll the virtual screen over. -- Rich Miner ULowell-Cntr for Productivity !ulowell!miner 617-452-5000x2693
may@husc4.HARVARD.EDU (Jason May) (05/14/87)
I agree that having a SUPERBITMAPped workbench screen would be great. One Mac feature I've always wanted on my Amiga was the ability to shift windows off the screen - all you have left is a little corner of the drag bar to pull it back again. Having the screen actually SUPERBITMAPped would be even better than this... Jason