formattedheight and formattedwidth

[Pete]

I am changing the stack size.  Each card in the stack in question needs to
have a different height and width dimension in order for all its controls to
be visible and, as you rightly point out, that has to be done by setting the
height and width properties of the stack, not the card.

I had initially inserted lines of code in the preOpenCard handler for each
individual card that set the height and width of the stack to specific
numbers.  But if I changed the design of the card or added a new card, I had
to change those numbers or remember to set the stack height and width so I
started looking for a generic method which I could put in the stack script
and I'd never have to worry about changing it again.

The formattedheight and formattedwidth properties ended up being the way to
do it, suitably adjusted to account for margins on each side of the card.
 The code I now use is:

set the height of this stack to the formattedheight of this card + 20
set the width of this stack to he formattedwidth of this card + 20

That works for any card in the stack as long as I make sure that the top let
control is positioned 10 pixels from the top and 10 pixels from the left
edge.

Hope that clears up the confusion.

Pete
Molly's Revenge <http://www.mollysrevenge.com>




On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 7:27 AM, Richard Gaskin
<ambassador at fourthworld.com>wrote:

> Pete wrote:
>
>  OK I see what you mean about the formatted versions of height/width.  The
>> straight height and width properties don't seem to come anywhere close to
>> working even allowing for menu bar issues (I'm on OS X). They set the
>> height/width to what they were for the previous card opened in the stack,
>> not the current card.
>>
>
> This thread confuses me, since the height and width properties of a card
> object cannot be set at all.
>
> A card is merely a container for controls inside the stack, allowing
> multiple sets of controls within a given window.  But the card always fills
> the stack, so changing the size of the stack will change the size of the
> card, but the size of the card itself cannot be set independently. Indeed,
> if it could what would happen to the area beyond the edges of a card which
> is smaller than the window displaying it?
>
> AFAIK, there's only one exception to the general rule that the card size
> will always be the same as the stack size:  if the stack has a menubar
> defined, its editMenus property is false (the default), and it's currently
> running under OS X.
>
> Since OS X has a global menu bar, the stack's menubar is scrolled out of
> view and the size of the stack is automatically cropped by the height of the
> menubar group.
>
> In that case, the height of the card will be the stack height + the height
> of the menubar group, and the card width will remain the same as the stack's
> width.
>
> Aside from that one set of circumstances on OS X, the card size should
> always reflect the stack size, and even on OS X with a menubar the stack
> size still governs the card size, the only difference being the height of
> the menubar group.
>
> So if you want to change the size of the window, just change the size of
> the stack.
>
> If you don't want to change the size of the window, what is the goal of
> attempting to change the card size?
>
> --
>  Richard Gaskin
>  Fourth World
>  LiveCode training and consulting: http://www.fourthworld.com
>  Webzine for LiveCode developers: http://www.LiveCodeJournal.com
>  LiveCode Journal blog: http://LiveCodejournal.com/**blog.irv<http://LiveCodejournal.com/blog.irv>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/**mailman/listinfo/use-livecode<http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode>
>
>