World: r3wp

Geomol, don't forget you can just use a higher resolution and scale 
it.

scale: 10
img: make image! reduce [370x290 white]

blk: compose [scale (1 / scale) (1 / scale) pen blue line-width 7 
line ]
for t 0.0 2.0 0.01 [
	s: sine 360 * t

 append blk as-pair round t * 185 * scale round 290 - (s * 145 + 145) 
 * scale
]
draw img blk
view layout [image img]

That's the way how the twips works 1px = 20twips so 1.2px = 24twips 
- the scaling is done on the draw engine side so you don't need to 
scale it yourself. In my dialect i just have directive 'units twips' 
and then the interpreter know that 24x24 is equal to 1.2x.1.2  --- 
if I'm not using twips all values are multiplied by 20 and rounded 
- that's the way how it's in Flash and in my Rebol/Flash dialect

(in Flash internals - in actionscript there is not decimal pair datatype, 
what I know)

Anyway, if there will be the decimal pair datatype, I will be very 
lucky :-))

OK, so that would be more comfortable and handy.

Anton, good point with the scale. :-)

Is it possible to add effects to am image using the draw dialect 
? (ie do something like tinting an image inside the draw dialect)

yes

I think you need to use the image inside the DRAW block.

The docs arent clear on how to do it though ....

hmm... wait

I don't think you can squeeze everything into the DRAW block, but 
you can of course do it inside the EFFECT block. I do remember seeing 
in the AGG test program in the Viewtop something that let you use 
transparency on top of an image, but I'm not sure taht's what you 
want

I wanted to use the an effect block inside of the draw dialect but 
I suspect that its not possible.

no that's not possible

OK .... thanks.

The EFFECT block is like a graphical pipeline. You can have a serie 
of effects and DRAW blocks after each other. Like:

img: to-image layout [box red "Red" box green "Green" box blue "Blue"]

view layout [box 200x400 white effect [draw [image img] tint 40 draw 
[translate 100x100 image img]]]

Phil, maybe you can use this to have, what you're after?

Oldes: that's bad design that one pixel equals to twips. From the 
definition twip should be resolution-independent, so it's nonsense 
to set it to some fixed value. But I know it's not your but Macromedia's 
fault.

Gemol .... that is interesting (I understand now what is meant by 
a a graphical pipeline) but not quite what I wanted. 

I have a draw block with a number of images and I want to apply an 
effect indivdual images.

You must precompute the images with the effects, then use them in 
the final draw block.

http://www.hmkdesign.dk/rebol/tab-view/tab-view.r<-- a very small 
demo.

Small, yet very nice! Clear and cool, reminds me on e.g. the buttons 
of my old tape deck. I think you've already said it before: the BTN 
style's look is nice, but it's way too under-represented in VID, 
making typical layouts look inconsistend. This one helps.

yep, actually it was more inspired by the segmented button in OSX. 
I think it conveys a much better message of grouped buttons than 
just using TOG buttons with OF 'group

now I'm beginning to wonder how SCROLLER would look :-)

infinitely segmented button ?

yeah

now I've run into the problem with VID elements sharing the same 
font object, which means that if I create three tab views, and change 
the font in the first one, the other two incorrectly also change. 
where exactly is this fixed? I've tried putting the font object inside 
the init code for the element, but this makes it impossible to change 
the font settings from within the layout.

I hit that problem with shared para object and the fix was:

stylize/master [
	area: area with [insert tail init [para: make para []]]
]

so something similiar for font should work.

If it's the LAYOUT user who want's different fonts, let him specify 
them.

If it''s you wanting to to have e.g. a second bold font just for 
the pressed tab in one tab-view, I think you may for example allocate 
two font objects and dynamically swap them in the FEEL/REDRAW.
Code fragment:


 redraw: func [face action offset] [... face/font: pick face/fonts 
 face/state ...]

You may even get along with changing a single font object:


 redraw: func [face action offset] [... face/font/style: if face/state 
 ['bold] ...]

Henrik, yes, if you expect the user will want to change the font 
attributes, you should clone the font in INIT, like this :

	font: make font []


That clones the original, shared font object that the style comes 
with. Now every instance of your style has its own font object.

(The same goes for any other facets that are objects. If you don't 
want to share them, clone them in init.)

now it's a chicken and egg thing. If I clone the object inside INIT, 
the font settings inside the layout is ignored, apparently because 
they are parsed before INIT is run.

imagine all the fun I am trying using VID within GLayout  ;-)

GWhat? :-)

henrik, just clone on change. VID also uses a flag in face/flags 
to indicate if a given subobject has been already cloned or not (so 
to clone only once)

FACE/CHANGES ?

In face/flags, if 'font word is in the block, then the font has already 
been cloned.

Pekr:  hahahaha

Henrik, can I see an example of what you mean by "font settings inside 
the layout" ? because I am not sure it's true, given:

view layout [style bx box "box" navy with [append init [font: make 
font []]] bx bx bx font-size 40 bx]

On Gabriele's note, use FLAG-FACE? to check for flags:

	>> layout [b: box]
	>> flag-face? b font
	== none
	>> layout [b: box font-size 30]
	>> flag-face? b font
	== [font]

and FLAG-FACE when you want to set a flag yourself.

so I suppose in INIT you might do:

	append init [
		if not flag-face? self font [  ; font not already cloned ?
			font: make font []   ; clone the font
			flag-face self font  ; remember that we cloned the font
		]
	]

So simple! ;)

Strangely, I don't recall ever having to use this technique in my 
styles, and I'm sure I dealt with these issues.

how do we know if current view or core version has access to pro 
features (a part from doing an /attempt on a lib call

/attempt = 'attempt

(catching an error if the call is not licenced)...  obviously this 
works, but its not very nice and it would be cool to be able to list 
available /pro features.

I've browsed the 'system word throughout but didn't notice any place 
where the license made a difference when I enabled/disabled it.

system/user-license  ?

Yes, that changes. You could do: