On 12/4/06, Øyvind Kolås <pippin@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 2. The term "bounding box" is clearer than "defined region". > > *gegl_node_get_bounding_box
>
> The names of the concept internally, and a decision externally
> might be propagated to the inside as well. Another option might be
> gegl_node_get_bounds , or with a naming choice more similar to the
> ones used by cairo, gegl_node_get_extents.
I've renamed this one to gegl_node_get_bounding_box for now,
I think gegl_node_get_dirty_rect should be renamed to be more similar
to gegl_node_get_bounding_box.
Perhaps:
gegl_node_get_bounding_box ()
gegl_node_get_dirty_bounding_box ();
gegl_node_clear_dirty ();
or
gegl_node_get_bounding_box ()
gegl_node_get_uncomputed_bounding_box ();
gegl_node_clear_uncomputed ();
Looking at this I realize that there should probably be some changes
to how this dirt is handled, a projection should keep track of this
itself, and instead of accumulating the dirt in the nodes, it should
ideally be propagated to the projections. Doing so efficiently
might require some pondering though.
/Øyvind L.
--
«The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed»
-- William Gibson
http://pippin.gimp.org/ http://ffii.org/
_______________________________________________
Gegl-developer mailing list
Gegl-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gegl-developer
