Clone graphic does not respect dimensions
Jeanne A. E. DeVoto
revolution at jaedworks.com
Thu Dec 1 17:38:15 CET 2016
At 7:39 AM -0800 12/1/2016, Richard Gaskin wrote:
>> Scott Rossi wrote
>>> It's wrong but it's always been like this. LC doesn't like graphics
> >> smaller than 9 pixels.
>> that is determined somewhat arbitrarily by the revBackScriptLibrary in
>> on newGraphic
>> if the width of the target < 9 and the height of the target < 9 then
> > .... use default values
>Would that be a user experience bug?
>What would be a good reason to prevent the user from doing a
>reasonable action like this?
>If the size is explicitly set, why not let it remain so?
I expect this was done to prevent the case where someone:
1. chooses a graphic tool from the Tools palette
2. clicks to start dragging out the graphic
3. accidentally double-clicks instead and ends the graphic, resulting
in an unintentionally-tiny graphic
It also lets you click once with a graphic tool to create a
default-size graphic at that spot.
Perhaps newGraphic could test what tool is chosen, and change the
size only if the tool is "graphic".
More information about the use-livecode