[Fenfire-dev] Re: [Fencommits] libvob: get rid of the old transformRect stuff in AWTVobCoorderBase

[Matti Katila]

On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Benja Fallenstein wrote:


> diff -rN -u libvob-old/org/nongnu/libvob/impl/awt/AWTVobCoorderBase.java 
> libvob-new/org/nongnu/libvob/impl/awt/AWTVobCoorderBase.java
> --- libvob-old/org/nongnu/libvob/impl/awt/AWTVobCoorderBase.java      
> 2005-02-17 00:58:50.720043071 +0200
> +++ libvob-new/org/nongnu/libvob/impl/awt/AWTVobCoorderBase.java      
> 2005-02-17 00:58:51.696896159 +0200
> @@ -333,15 +333,10 @@
>           void put(Coordinates into) {
>               into.copy(getParent(), cs());
>           }
> -         void doTransformRect(float[] rect, boolean useInterp) { 
> -             transformRect(getParent(), rect, useInterp);
> -         }




> Wed Feb 16 16:48:26 EET 2005  Benja Fallenstein <address@hidden>
>   * get rid of the old transformRect stuff in AWTVobCoorderBase

(*sigh*) 

All that work to implement recursive vob scenes for AWT and now all code 
works just like the old Coorder code again...

And:

        new Trans() {   // 6 concatInverse
            public String toString() { return "concat inverse"; }
            void doTransformRect(float[] rect, boolean useInterp) { 
                inverseTransformRect(inds[cs()+2], rect, useInterp);
                transformRect(inds[cs()+1], rect, useInterp);
            }
            void put(Coordinates into) {
                int p1 = inds[cs()+1], p2 = inds[cs()+2];
                float[] f = { 0,0,1,1,0};
                doTransformRect(f, false);
                into.setX(cs(), f[0]);
                into.setY(cs(), f[1]);
                into.setSX(cs(), f[2]);
                into.setSY(cs(), f[3]);
                into.setD(cs(), f[4]);
                
                /*
                  XXX doesn't work!!!  Benja: Fix this!
                into.setX(cs(), into.x(p2)*into.sx(p1)/into.sx(p2)+into.x(p1));
                into.setY(cs(), into.y(p2)*into.sy(p1)/into.sy(p2)+into.y(p1));
                */
                into.setSX(cs(), into.sx(p1)/into.sx(p2));
                into.setSY(cs(), into.sy(p1)/into.sy(p2));
                into.setD(cs(), into.d(p1) - into.d(p2));
            }

One is readable, which one?


   -Matti