|
forums.silverfrost.com Welcome to the Silverfrost forums
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
LitusSaxonicum
Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 2388 Location: Yateley, Hants, UK
|
Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:21 pm Post subject: Has %gi disappeared again? |
|
|
FTN95 v 6.0 (PE) complains about it.
Eddie |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 7930 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 7:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
It can test this but it is more likely that you have accessed an old salflibc.dll by mistake. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LitusSaxonicum
Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 2388 Location: Yateley, Hants, UK
|
Posted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 11:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, quite likely on reflection. Didn't think of that. Thanks.
However, this brings up an interesting issue. I've been using 4.90 quite happily. Somewhere in the setting up of toolbars, I have this awful pair of WINIO@ calls:
Code: | i=WINIO@('%fn[Arial]%ts%`ap%`bg%tc[black]%22`rs%sf&',
& 0.9D0, 70.0D0, 1.65D0, RGB@(238,238,243), SSTOT)
i=WINIO@('%ap%bm[TB]&',0,0) |
The first statement simply puts an updatable message SSTOT (character*(22) ) onto a toolbar, the second statement slides a bitmap underneath it - the bitmap contains an elegant "cartouche" to outline the message.
(Actually, there are several versions of this pair of statements, as the scaling is different if large_fonts are enabled).
Unfortunately, with 6.00 there are several extra lines of pixels underneath the %rs text which then overwrites the border of the cartouche. I also seem to have a salflibc.dll for 5.20, and this does the same as 6.00.
My workaround was to continue to use 4.90! I suppose I'll need to ponder on another solution.
Eddie
More thoughts: %ws does the trick, but isn't updatable by WINDOW_UPDATE@ (SSTOT). %st also appears to do the job, although the positioning is different to %`rs, and it is updatable, so it is the final solution. I wonder why I didn't use %st in the first instance? More to the point, why couldn't I find the [no_additional_space] setting in Clearwin.enh the first few times I read it?
E |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LitusSaxonicum
Joined: 23 Aug 2005 Posts: 2388 Location: Yateley, Hants, UK
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
... and after a lot of work, torn out hair, muttered expletives etc, I have had to go back to %`rs because it does what I need to.
However, I still have those extra pixels under the text. They definitely arrived some time after v4.90, and they are completely surplus to requirements. Did you (Paul) ever find out where they came from? (and is there a chance that they could disappear equally mysteriously?). Probably not, as I suspect they were slipped in so that one might have (for example) double underline as a "future enhancement".
Problem is slightly compounded by the fact that the vertical coordinate in %`ap won't position to the nearest pixel, but rather it jumps by 2 pixels. So, with the coordinate at 1.62487D0 the position is 2 pixels different from when the coordinate is 1.62488D0 - i.e. the implicit jump of 1/100000 of the character height = 2 pixels!
Eddie |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PaulLaidler Site Admin
Joined: 21 Feb 2005 Posts: 7930 Location: Salford, UK
|
Posted: Sat Nov 26, 2011 9:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
The output looks OK on my screen.
It probably depends on the screen resolution and small adjustments may be required to the %ts value for different resolutions. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|