Re: [AD] Meaning of the texture coordinates for the primitives addon |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.liballeg.org/allegro-developers Archives
]
On 2009-08-26, Peter Wang <novalazy@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2009-08-25, Elias Pschernig <elias.pschernig@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 16:52 +0200, Anders Andersson wrote:
> > > I think it may be good to support both 0-1 and 0-bitmap_size. Why choose one?
> > >
> >
> > Supporting both (but with default being pixels) doesn't sound bad. Maybe
> > have an al_use_texture_transform function?
>
> Well, my first reaction is that you'll end up with code using different
> conventions, so now you have to know what convention is in effect when
> reading/writing code and switching between them at runtime.
Actually, here's a counterproposal:
For the same reasons that you want parameterised (normalised) texture
coordinates, al_draw_scaled_bitmap, al_draw_rotated_scaled_bitmap, etc.
should take parameterised coordinates for the source bitmap.
The destination coordinates would still in be pixel coordinates.
Questions about adding transforms to the core library:
1. Does that mean we remove al_draw_rotated/scaled_bitmap?
2. Can we support transforms efficiently for TTF fonts? I assume bitmap
fonts would be fine.
Peter