-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 567
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Improve Split accuracy. #738
Conversation
@Zarenor are you around? Any interest in taking a look at this? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Okay a couple little notes, but looks good. Sorry for the wait.
druid/src/widget/split.rs
Outdated
/// Builder-style method to set whether the splitter handle is drawn as a solid rectangle. | ||
/// | ||
/// If this is `false` (the default), it will be drawn as two parallel lines. | ||
pub fn fill_splitter_handle(mut self, solid: bool) -> Self { | ||
self.solid = solid; | ||
self | ||
} | ||
fn splitter_hit_test(&self, size: Size, mouse_pos: Point) -> bool { | ||
|
||
/// Returns the width of the area of mouse hit detection. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
'width' is kind of confusing for a vertical splitter, but whatever 🤷♂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
'breadth', so we're not implying directionality (vs 'width' or 'height')?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd used 'size' before, because I hadn't been able to come up with 'breadth'
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think breadth is probably more confusing than advantageous. I think size is good?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah the usage of width
is a bit confusing. Previously Split
used both size
and width
to refer to this and I didn't spend much time thinking about it. I think it's best to use only one word for this concept and I'll do that update.
As for what word to use, size
is decent. I can also think of thickness
and cross length
. I kind of like thickness
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
whichever you like; I still prefer size I think, thickness has z-axis implications for me?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well there's no z-axis involved with Split
so that's an unlikely clash. Also Flutter seems to use thickness.
That said, I went with size
for now due to its shortness and better fit with area
.
druid/src/widget/split.rs
Outdated
splitter_size: f64, | ||
min_splitter_area: f64, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe this should be an Option<f64>
, so that we can default to using the splitter size when this isn't passed explicitly? Maybe?
I'm not sure. I'm just thinking of in the example where you set the splitter size to 3, should we keep the same default min_splitter_area? Maybe...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think having it set by default with some reasonable value is best. The main reason this exists is to allow extremely narrow splitter bars without sacrificing the user experience by requiring them to pixel hunt. So if someone wants a 3px bar, or even a 1px bar, they can easily do so but druid will default to a 6px bar area. If they want the area to also be 1px then they can set the minimum area to e.g. 0px.
druid/src/widget/split.rs
Outdated
|
||
let min_offset = (self.splitter_size * 0.5).min(5.0); | ||
let mut min_limit = self.min_size.max(min_offset); | ||
let mut max_limit = (size_in_splitted_direction - self.min_size.max(min_offset)).max(0.0); | ||
let mut min_limit = self.min_size; | ||
let mut max_limit = (size_in_split_direction - min_limit).max(0.0); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see we've removed the absolute '5.0' minimum. This was originally added to 'fix' the possibility that the splitter would get 'lost' in the edge of it's container - or that nested splitters could collide.
I'm okay with removing it if the behavior is still acceptable in these extrema, but it's something worth checking for.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This minimum isn't needed with the new logic, because the splitter bar is guaranteed to always be visible. This specific function calculates the min/max limits given the provided size and doesn't need to know about the splitter bar at all. The bar logic is elsewhere.
I'm sorry I didn't see this earlier. I added a few more comments here. I'm really glad to see the work on quantizing move forward, and I appreciate the other improvements made. Looks great! |
I addressed the feedback and made some other improvements.
|
Based on the discussion in zulip I renamed the constructor helpers from vertical/horizontal to row/cols. Split::columns(child1, child2) // left and right
Split::rows(child1, child2) // top and bottom |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
okay, works for me, I think making the names consistent with Flex is a good solution.
This PR includes a slew of changes to the
Split
widget.min_splitter_area(f64)
method which basically acts as padding around the split bar. This padding still reacts to mouse events. As a result it is possible to use extremely narrow split bars while still having a reasonable area for the user to click on. Fixes The handle of the Split widget should have a minimum hit area #641.split_point
chosen by the user. The widget still modifies the split point when the size constraints require it (e.g. when resizing the window to extremely small) however now the user chosen split point is restored as soon as the constraints allow it.splitter_size
has slightly changed, to a less surprising interpretation.4px wide solid fill with 3px padding on each side.
With the fill width formula being: size - 2*((size/3).floor())
Now a 10 with a solid fill means a 10px wide solid fill.
The new
min_splitter_area
can be used to add padding.2px pad | ~2px line | 2px pad | ~2px line | 2px pad
With 1px lines being centered (size/3).floor() pixels away from edges.
Now a 10 with a line style means: 3px line | 4px pad | 3px line
Padding at edges can be added optionally with
min_splitter_area
.Generally speaking the
Split
widget still has issues, which were there before and aren't addressed here, e.g. children still being drawn when they have zero sized layout. I'll probably tackle this at least partially in a future PR.