65535 limit?

[Jim Ault]

I guess what I was thinking is that the various groups are positioned  
edge to edge to make them 'side by side', kind of like a 3-dimensional  
patchwork quilt, or a technicolor dreamcoat.  Perhaps what you are  
saying is that positioning two groups still needs to remain within the  
32767.

Jim

On Jan 8, 2010, at 8:17 AM, Fred Moyer wrote:

> Thanks Jim for the input. Yes, because of Rev's limitation, I will  
> have to redesign using something like what you describe. But given  
> my particular application, keeping all images side-by-side would  
> have been far preferable and simpler.
>
> Fred
>
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 11:00 AM, Jim Ault wrote:
>
>> Message: 13
>> Date: Tue, 5 Jan 2010 15:12:04 -0800
>> From: Jim Ault <jimaultwins at yahoo.com>
>> Subject: Re: 65535 limit?
>> To: How to use Revolution <use-revolution at lists.runrev.com>
>> Message-ID: <4810F2BE-9D67-45BE-AE93-D32291627488 at yahoo.com>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>>
>> Rather than worry about maximums and future changes that could hamper
>> performance, why not make several smaller groups that 'overlap' in a
>> collage of sorts, then move all the groups as one?
>> Maybe I am missing the point, so let me know.
>>
>>
>> Jim Ault
>> Las Vegas
>>
>>
>>
>> On Jan 5, 2010, at 11:22 AM, Fred Moyer wrote:
>>
>>> The Stack Inspector states that the default maximum width of a stack
>>> is 65535. However, on my Mac I can't set the width of a stack to
>>> greater than 32767 pixels (half of 65534.) Similarly, on page 49 of
>>> the User's guide, the "Maximum size of an object" is given as
>>> "Unlimited". But I can't set the width of an object to greater than
>>> 32767.
>>>
>>> What is bizarre is that I can make a control 65534 pixels wide by
>>> making the rect of the control (for example) -32767, 10, 32767,100.
>>> However, if I try to make the rect of the stack "-32767, 10,
>>> 32767,100" Revolution crashes or resizes to a seemingly random rect.
>>>
>>> Are these stated limits actually incorrect or am I misunderstanding
>>> something? Does it work correctly in Windows (maybe this is a Mac
>>> problem)? Does anyone know a workaround to that 32767 limit? And out
>>> of curiosity, what is the significance of that number? Will it soon/
>>> ever change?
>>>
>>> I am designing a stack that consists of a single normal-sized card
>>> that contains a normal-sized group whose lockloc is set to true. The
>>> group contains many images placed side-by-side next to one another.
>>> One can scroll to any picture almost instantly by using the group's
>>> HScrollbar. This stack is great but sometimes there are so many
>>> images in the group that the formattedwidth of the group is greater
>>> than 32768 -- or would be, but I can't get to that point while
>>> setting up the stack. All kinds of strange things happen.
>>> Incidentally 65535 would be wide enough to accommodate my needs, so
>>> if Revolution simply worked as stated, it would be fine. Any ideas/
>>> comments?
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your  
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution

Jim Ault
Las Vegas