Complete.Org: Mailing Lists: Archives: freeciv-dev: October 2001:
[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Tile drawingorder
Home

[Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Tile drawingorder

[Top] [All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index] [Thread Index]
To: swk@xxxxxxxxxxxx, freeciv-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Freeciv-Dev] Re: [Patch] Tile drawingorder
From: Raimar Falke <hawk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2001 18:40:30 +0200
Reply-to: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 01:08:12AM +0200, Bert Buchholz wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I made a patch that solves (?) some problems with the gui, that I think
> were problems, here a description of the patch:
> 
> Tile drawingorder change (v.1) (against cvs-Oct-07-01):
> 
> - Farmland/irrigation are now drawn before rivers and specials to keep
>   rivers and specials visible which were covered partially by irrigation
>   and completely by farmland, so that they were virtually invisible.
> 
> - Now it looks as if a river is flowing through farmland and the
>   specials (if any) are on top of irrigation/farmland => visible.
> 
> - I think this increases the overview quite effectively, because you
>   don't have to turn off certain drawing-stuff just to see what's under
>   it or click with the middle-button on it.
> 
> 
> I hope this is understandable. To make it absolutely clear, I uploaded
> two screenshots (~24k each) into ftp://ftp.freeciv.org/pub/freeciv/incoming/
> 
> 1) drawingorder_nopatch.jpeg   No patch applied
> 2) drawingorder_patch.jpeg     Patch applied, important parts marked with red
>                                arrows :-)
> 
> I think, the diff is rather obvious. If you have comments, rejections
> etc. pp. and stuff the like, please tell me. BTW: Daniel Speyer's
> approach was okay (see "[gtk+iso] Farmland covering tile" from some days
> ago), but I think my way is the better [tm] one, even though probably far
> from perfect or anything. Dunno.

I added some docu and omitted the non-iso changes. I don't see a flaw
in the current ordering for non-iso. Comments?

        Raimar

-- 
 email: rf13@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 "I do feel kind of sorry for Microsoft. Their attornies and marketing
  force must have tons of ulcers trying to figure out how to beat (not
  just co-exist with) a product that has no clearly defined (read
  suable) human owner, and that changes on an hourly basis like the
  sea changes the layout of the sand on a beach. Severely tough to
  fight something like that."
    -- David D.W. Downey at linux-kernel

Attachment: draw_order2.diff
Description: Text document


[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]