Page 1 of 1

display zoom sizes < 50%

Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2016 9:57 am
by filbo
See viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2216

If you fool around with window size dragging while the Setup -> Graphics menu is displayed, you will see the "Window scaling" setting change from (e.g.) "100% (Default)" to "101% (Current)". If you then pull down that menu, you'll see that "101% (Current)" was added to the menu -- very slick.

However, if you shrink the window to < 50%, both the title bar and "Window scaling" menu entry will only say "50%". (It's possible that the window is supposed to balk at being shrunk smaller than 50%, and my window manager is ignoring a hint -- if so, well, I'm sitting here running playback in a window whose entire play area is the same size as ONE character cel of a 100%-zoom window, and I can still more or less tell what's going on. It looks silly and cool! So please don't block it at 50% :)

... OK, I see the code that handles this in src/events.c. It doesn't look like you're hinting the window manager (and that's good).

I say: sure, stop <Ctrl>- at 50% (and <Ctrl>+ at 300%) -- but if the user drags the window size to some odd value, you should display that odd value. As you do for non-multiples of 10, but not for <50% (nor, presumably, >300%).

Re: display zoom sizes < 50%

Posted: Thu Apr 21, 2016 11:43 pm
by Holger
If you fool around with window size dragging while the Setup -> Graphics menu is displayed, you will see the "Window scaling" setting change from (e.g.) "100% (Default)" to "101% (Current)". If you then pull down that menu, you'll see that "101% (Current)" was added to the menu -- very slick.
This still contained a bug: When selecting a pre-configured scaling value (like "100%") from such a list, the "custom" entry (with "101% (current)", for example), was still there, but shouldn't. This is fixed now.
However, if you shrink the window to < 50%, both the title bar and "Window scaling" menu entry will only say "50%".
The window title bar should always reflect the real scaling value. This is fixed now.

The window scaling selection list indeed has a minimum value that can't get smaller, to prevent absurdly small scaling values saved to the setup config file by accident (so after a restart the window won't be smaller than that minimum scaling). (However, if you really want it, you can manually enter a smaller value into the setup config file ("setup.conf") with a text editor, and have R'n'D fire up with that scaling value.)
I'm sitting here running playback in a window whose entire play area is the same size as ONE character cel of a 100%-zoom window, and I can still more or less tell what's going on. It looks silly and cool!
Indeed it does! ;-)

BTW: Although the minimum pre-configured scaling value is still "50%", I've lowered the minimum allowed value to be saved to the config file to 30% (which can now also be achieved by using the Ctrl-"-" shortcut). The same goes for the maximum value which is now at 400%. (Not that I expect that anybody needs such a high value anytime soon...)

Re: display zoom sizes < 50%

Posted: Fri Apr 22, 2016 1:59 am
by filbo
> This still contained a bug: When selecting a pre-configured scaling value (like "100%")
> from such a list, the "custom" entry (with "101% (current)", for example), was still
> there, but shouldn't. This is fixed now.

If you conceptualize that as "My favorite size that I was just zoomed to a moment ago, until by mistake I let go of the mouse while focused on 90%", this feels more like a feature than a bug...

> The window title bar should always reflect the real scaling value. This is fixed now.

Thanks! Not yet pulled & tested, will probably do that after reading 3rd reply...

> The same goes for the maximum value which is now at 400%. (Not that I expect that
> anybody needs such a high value anytime soon...)

Well, how else are they going to display properly when playing RnD on a stadium display screen during a long injury-timeout? :)

(I'm sure that in actuality those screens have perfectly normal pixel dimensions like 1920x1280 or maybe even 800x600, combined with absurdly huge pixels...)