Home » Developing U++ » U++ Developers corner » Should we double-buffer by default?
Re: Should we double-buffer by default? [message #4079 is a reply to message #4071] |
Wed, 19 July 2006 16:25   |
|
luzr wrote on Wed, 19 July 2006 05:47 | Attempt to describe sibling Ctrl intersection problem:
You have opaque Ctrl (can be painted unbuffered) which is intersected by next sibling transparent Ctrl.
|
Lets be more precise. Saying sibling you mean child control or control placed somewhere next to this opaque control (but not involved into parent->child relation).
If you saying intersected you mean that a control is partialy coverd by another control or that another control lies inside a control placed below it or both cases?
Quote: |
(other part of this sibling Ctrl is above either parent Ctrl or worse, can be above ANOTHER opaque sibling)
|
Althought I think I understand it would be nice if you put some screenshot to ilustrate the problem.
Sorry for going so deep into details but I want to be sure that we are speaking the same language and I understand problem correctly.
[Updated on: Wed, 19 July 2006 16:26] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
 |
|
Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:23
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:31
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Tue, 18 July 2006 15:56
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 16:36
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Tue, 18 July 2006 23:43
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Tue, 18 July 2006 23:57
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 00:42
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 08:09
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 08:34
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 09:01
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 10:09
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:01
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:18
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 11:47
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: unodgs on Wed, 19 July 2006 16:25
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 16:43
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 18:56
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Wed, 19 July 2006 21:14
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Fri, 21 July 2006 10:44
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mirek on Fri, 21 July 2006 12:10
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
|
 |
|
Re: Should we double-buffer by default?
By: mr_ped on Wed, 19 July 2006 15:04
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Mon Jun 09 08:34:33 CEST 2025
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.04720 seconds
|