1. I will consider #1. There might be a way to inject those values. 2. The only thing I’ve done with LayoutBase is remove code on the JS side. Measurement is *NOT* assumed. Not sure what you mean here. 3. Beads are not a bad idea, but I’d really like to find a cheaper way of getting beads by type than we currently have.
> On Apr 9, 2018, at 8:29 PM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: > > You can see the areas I commented out or removed in the MXRoyale branch. > > 1) There is no need for slots for measuredWidth/measuredHeight on UIBase. > 2) LayoutBase should not assume each host needs measuring or cares that > its measurements might change. > 3) The measurement, when needed, should be generated by loading a bead and > asking the bead for the measurement. > > If our examples have been working fine, then we should really think hard > before adding weight to those simple examples. > > My 2 cents, > -Alex > > On 4/9/18, 10:20 AM, "Harbs" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Can you be more specific? >> >> What isn’t PAYG? The measuredWidth and measuredHeight setters and >> getters. I can’t think of anything else. >> >> I expect to get back to this later this week. >> >>> On Apr 9, 2018, at 7:21 PM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Harbs, >>> >>> I was merging these changes into MXRoyale and discovered some things >>> that >>> aren't PAYG. Measurement should not be assumed on every component. >>> Many >>> components will be fine without ever requiring measurement. There were >>> already some measurement beads around. Measurement should be its own >>> subsystem. I'm commenting out these assumptions in the MXRoyale branch >>> for now so we can continue with the emulation components. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -Alex >>> >>> On 3/29/18, 1:28 PM, "Harbs" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Great. :-) >>>> >>>>> On Mar 29, 2018, at 11:24 PM, Carlos Rovira <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> I rebase jewel branch and updated my local UIBase with the new changes >>>>> and >>>>> all seems to work properly. >>>>> >>>>> thanks >>>> >>> >> >
