|Anonymous | Login||08-22-2019 17:56 UTC|
|Main | My View | View Issues | Change Log | Docs|
|Viewing Issue Simple Details [ Jump to Notes ]||[ View Advanced ] [ Issue History ] [ Print ]|
|ID||Category||Severity||Reproducibility||Date Submitted||Last Update|
|0005998||[Squeak] Morphic||major||always||02-10-07 22:54||03-01-07 05:48|
|Summary||0005998: How do you get a halo on a submorph that is outside of its owners bounds?|
For this one:
Get two objects. (I used rectangles)
Embed the smaller in the larger.
Using the brown halo handle drag the embed object so that it is partially outside of its owner.
put the cursor over that outside part and halo click.
----The halo will form around owner not the submorph.
-----the halo will not change its focus.
Put the cursor over the overlaping part of submorph and owner.
----Successive clicks will alternate halo focus between them.
now brown handle drag the submorph almost all the way outside its owner.
-----It will be hard to find the right spot to halo click.
If one of the owners halos overlaps the submorph, halo click on that.
---The halo focus will transfer to the submorph.
Regular clicking, even on the part of the submorph outside of its owner,
will cause the owner and its submorph to be picked up.
What I would like to see is halo clicking on a submorph will always include the submorph in the halo focus rotation even if the submorph is way outside its owner.
The current limitation of not being able to halo a submorph is very annoying. Thus the major designation.
(0010220 - 214 - 224 - 224 - 224 - 224 - 224)
|FWIW, note that if you hold down *shift* as you halo-click on such an extralimital submorph, you *do* get the halo on it. Armed with this factoid, perhaps you might not wish to characterize this issue as "Major."|
(0010242 - 554 - 632 - 632 - 632 - 632 - 632)
Thanks for the idea. I just tried it and it works fine.
Please note that I have given this a major status but a low priority.
What I don't understand is why, if it is easy to do (give the submorph a halo), it isn't normally done?
It is easy for those with the info to do it. I don't know if that counts.
How does a newbie get to know this?
My experience is a certain frustration everytime I want to focus on a submorph that can't be haloed (minus the factoid, of course).
What purpose does it serve to make the distinction?
(0010279 - 834 - 890 - 890 - 890 - 890 - 890)
I seriously doubt that the current behavior regarding obtaining halos on extralimital submorphs was a design choice -- I think most likely it was "just what the code does."
Thus, I don't think it serves any purpose to make the distinction -- it's just a bug/unfeature, to whch a fix would be welcome.
If it did turn out to be "easy to do" to fix it so that the preferred halo-transfer behavior on a second unshifted click on an extralimital submorph does put the halo up on that submorph, I doubt that there would be any objection to changing the code to do that.
On a related note, I think that it's at least arguable the *first* halo-click on an extralimital submorph ought to attach the halo onto that submorph right away, rather than attaching it to the container which itself is not under the mouse. What do you think?
(0010310 - 327 - 415 - 415 - 415 - 415 - 415)
I think you are right on both points.
I think getting the halo where you click fits "Do-what-I-mean."
So now its just a matter of finding a fix or two.
(And the test to get it past Ralph's gate keepers) :-]
Thanks for your help and support.
Feel free to suggest a fix if you see a good one.
|02-10-07 22:54||wiz||New Issue|
|02-27-07 07:55||ScottWallace||Note Added: 0010220|
|02-28-07 03:24||wiz||Note Added: 0010242|
|02-28-07 19:17||ScottWallace||Note Added: 0010279|
|03-01-07 05:48||wiz||Note Added: 0010310|
| Mantis 1.0.8[^]
Copyright © 2000 - 2007 Mantis Group
44 total queries executed.|
33 unique queries executed.