I've just committed the first cut of the new eraser tool.
This first part only adds in the functionality to cut away parts of objects you have selected. It won't do anything if you don't have something selected, and it won't do anything if the first mode is selected (the sub-toolbar has toggles for the two modes). However it does commit all the infrastructure changes including the new icons, new drawing context, verbs, switching, etc. I had been wanting to get that in first to shake down bugs in that support work.
Hopefully I'll be able to get the other mode committed this weekend. That's the main differentiator and works like touch-delete or perhaps pop-the-balloons.
Please let me know if there is anything in that commit that needs fixing, etc. etc.
Thanks.
This looks promising, but unfortunately breaks the Win32 (and possibly other?) build at present.
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/222509
Didn't notice your post here until after filing the bug report.
Cheers,
Rygle.
Jon A. Cruz wrote:
I've just committed the first cut of the new eraser tool.
And what an excellent test of the continueOnError flag. It basically tells buildtool "compile as much as you can."
bob
rygle wrote:
This looks promising, but unfortunately breaks the Win32 (and possibly other?) build at present.
See https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/222509
Didn't notice your post here until after filing the bug report.
Cheers,
Rygle.
Jon A. Cruz wrote:
I've just committed the first cut of the new eraser tool.
-----Original Message----- From: inkscape-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net [mailto:inkscape-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net] On Behalf Of Bob Jamison Sent: zaterdag 26 april 2008 16:42 To: rygle; inkscape Subject: Re: [Inkscape-devel] New tool added
And what an excellent test of the continueOnError flag. It basically tells buildtool "compile as much as you can."
Exactly why I wanted it!!! Thanks a bunch!
Johan
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:35 AM, rygle <pittos@...1208...> wrote:
This looks promising, but unfortunately breaks the Win32 (and possibly other?) build at present.
linux too
make: *** No rule to make target `eraser-context.o', needed by `libinkpre.a'. Stop.
Jon A. Cruz wrote:
I've just committed the first cut of the new eraser tool.
This first part only adds in the functionality to cut away parts of objects you have selected. It won't do anything if you don't have something selected, and it won't do anything if the first mode is selected (the sub-toolbar has toggles for the two modes). However it does commit all the infrastructure changes including the new icons, new drawing context, verbs, switching, etc. I had been wanting to get that in first to shake down bugs in that support work.
Hopefully I'll be able to get the other mode committed this weekend. That's the main differentiator and works like touch-delete or perhaps pop-the-balloons.
Please let me know if there is anything in that commit that needs fixing, etc. etc.
Very cool...
Initial issues: It isn't very undo friendly at the moment. It requires two undos if you have one object selected, and one additional undo for every additional object you have selected. So, 4 objects require 5 undos to get them to the state prior to doing one eraser stroke. Also, it doesn't appear that the width control does anything.
RFE: Can you make it so width can go to zero so it's like a scalpel/knife mode? This will close some existing rfes with people looking for a dedicated knife tool.
Q: Will you be making the eraser more configurable? Like with assignable profiles? (similar to how the calligraphy tool can do it, but without all of the params... just some presets) I only ask because I don't like the angled line it currently uses. If you have no plans to do this, this Q is really an RFE then. ;)
If you would like formal RFEs filed, please let me know.
Thanks for making working with a tablet even more natural! :)
-Josh
On Apr 26, 2008, at 7:25 PM, Josh Andler wrote:
Initial issues: It isn't very undo friendly at the moment. It requires two undos if you have one object selected, and one additional undo for every additional object you have selected. So, 4 objects require 5 undos to get them to the state prior to doing one eraser stroke. Also, it doesn't appear that the width control does anything.
Yes. I've not yet tuned up the undo. That will get addressed this weekend.
I'll also be tuning up various config items. Knife, though, will probably stay an RFE.
On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 19:25 -0700, Josh Andler wrote:
Initial issues: It isn't very undo friendly at the moment. It requires two undos if you have one object selected, and one additional undo for every additional object you have selected. So, 4 objects require 5 undos to get them to the state prior to doing one eraser stroke.
Fixed as of revision 18438.
:-)
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
Please let me know if there is anything in that commit that needs fixing, etc. etc.
1. Simplification of path seems to be broken
2. At one time I managed to get tools "broken" by clicking on their icons and getting all of them active in terms of the look of respective buttons (down/up state).
3. If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
4. Erasing black rectangle is like looking for a black cat in a dark room :)
Alexandre
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 1:42 PM, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
Please let me know if there is anything in that commit that needs fixing, etc. etc.
Simplification of path seems to be broken
At one time I managed to get tools "broken" by clicking on their
icons and getting all of them active in terms of the look of respective buttons (down/up state).
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
- Erasing black rectangle is like looking for a black cat in a dark room :)
5. The new tool has no hotkeys ;-) (either one-key hotkey or Shift+Fn)
Alexandre
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
- Erasing black rectangle is like looking for a black cat in a dark room :)
Not that I ever saw a purple cat, but it's same story with purple objects. Could the tool possibly have a cursor in the lines of Tweak tool?
Alexandre
On Apr 28, 2008, at 5:56 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
- Erasing black rectangle is like looking for a black cat in a
dark room :)
Not that I ever saw a purple cat, but it's same story with purple objects. Could the tool possibly have a cursor in the lines of Tweak tool?
An initial fix of getting the preferences set and visible for the eraser stroke itself might help. I'll follow up with that
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
I concur! Moving around erased rectangle seems like a lot of fun! Though probably now what the author had in mind. It is an interesting tool nevertheless (although it seems like the same can be accomplished with boolean tools and calligraphic strokes)
Regards,
-- Marcin Floryan http://marcin.floryan.pl/ [GPG Key ID: 0D5581C5]
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:10 AM, Marcin Floryan <mfloryan@...1877...> wrote:
I concur! Moving around erased rectangle seems like a lot of fun! Though probably now what the author had in mind. It is an interesting tool nevertheless (although it seems like the same can be accomplished with boolean tools and calligraphic strokes)
That was exactly my point. I think this tool needs more unique conveniences to justify its existence as opposed to a mode of the Calligraphic tool.
Also, right now it seems to use high fixation and a fixed angle of the brush, with no way to adjust it. And making it adjustable will basically duplicate the Calligraphic controls. Even if they use the same code under the hood, duplicating in the UI is no less unclean than duplicating in the code.
On Apr 28, 2008, at 7:50 AM, bulia byak wrote:
That was exactly my point. I think this tool needs more unique conveniences to justify its existence as opposed to a mode of the Calligraphic tool.
Also, right now it seems to use high fixation and a fixed angle of the brush, with no way to adjust it. And making it adjustable will basically duplicate the Calligraphic controls. Even if they use the same code under the hood, duplicating in the UI is no less unclean than duplicating in the code.
Yes... but only for some users and only for some modes.
The second mode that deletes all things that were touched is underway. That functionality is even more divergent. The main delay is that it takes dissecting the boolean op code in livarot.
And for the options, those are known and still are to be added and hooked up. Tuning such parameters is simple, doing complex region intersect detection is much trickier.
And the bottom line is that for users the large majority of artists, etc. that I've been able to determine tend to look for the analog to the real-world tools they've used. Very few are used to complex flipping and loading their pens up with acid to remove ink that they've drawn with. Almost every single person I've wanted pick up Inkscape for the first time over the last few years tend hunt around and try to find an eraser.
I don't think Emacs keybindings are an appropriate solution for everyone and do not try to impose them on others, despite them being one of the faster ways for me to work. For many of the same reasons I also don't think burying things as just a sub-mode of a different tool that is often thought of as serving a different purpose is good UI.
The second mode that deletes all things that were touched is underway. That functionality is even more divergent. The main delay is that it takes dissecting the boolean op code in livarot.
Sorry for chiming in without having read the whole thread and without even having had a chance to try the new tool yet. But isn't there new code for boolean operations in 2geom which will eventually supersede the livarot one? Maybe this would spare you the time to mess around with the old code. In case I'm wrong or misunderstood the point of your comment wrong, please bear with me. :)
Cheers, Max
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Marcin Floryan wrote:
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
I concur! Moving around erased rectangle seems like a lot of fun! Though probably now what the author had in mind. It is an interesting tool nevertheless (although it seems like the same can be accomplished with boolean tools and calligraphic strokes)
If you mean that it should be possible to pan around erased region, then yes - it's an interesting feature. But then it should be predictable ;-) Right now it looks like a bug (and it actually is a bug at least from rendering perspective).
Alexandre
On Apr 28, 2008, at 7:10 AM, Marcin Floryan wrote:
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
I concur! Moving around erased rectangle seems like a lot of fun! Though probably now what the author had in mind. It is an interesting tool nevertheless (although it seems like the same can be accomplished with boolean tools and calligraphic strokes)
I'm having a bit of a problem trying to visualize and reproduce the exact problem. Can anyone who is seeing it do a quick bug and give it a small sample file and/or screenshot?
Thanks.
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:11 AM, wrote:
On Apr 28, 2008, at 7:10 AM, Marcin Floryan wrote:
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
I concur! Moving around erased rectangle seems like a lot of fun! Though probably now what the author had in mind. It is an interesting tool nevertheless (although it seems like the same can be accomplished with boolean tools and calligraphic strokes)
I'm having a bit of a problem trying to visualize and reproduce the exact problem. Can anyone who is seeing it do a quick bug and give it a small sample file and/or screenshot?
https://bugs.launchpad.net/inkscape/+bug/224101
Alexandre
I'm having a bit of a problem trying to visualize and reproduce the exact problem. Can anyone who is seeing it do a quick bug and give it a small sample file and/or screenshot?
I cannot reproduce this bug either. I'm using the latest SVN on Win32, built about an hour ago. Eraser tool works perfectly for me. Also i downloaded and opened the svg attached to the bug report and was able to erase portions of the rectangles without issue. However when i initially open the svg it does render exactly as displayed in the screenshot, but it appears as though the object simply has two separate paths. I can erase them as well with no issue.
Quasar
On Apr 28, 2008, at 5:40 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
- Simplification of path seems to be broken
How so? If this doesn't settle down shortly go ahead and enter a separate bug for this so we can track it.
- At one time I managed to get tools "broken" by clicking on their
icons and getting all of them active in terms of the look of respective buttons (down/up state).
Eww!!!!
That's actually down in some code that has a bit of an ugly state of things. That code needs to be changed and decoupled anyway, since that direct coupling is what is blocking switching to stock GTK+ toolbars for the vertical one.
- If I draw a rectangle, then erase inside and start moving
rectangle, what I drew with Eraser will start moving away from rectangle.
- Erasing black rectangle is like looking for a black cat in a
dark room :)
Oh! That needs some work. The eraser tool has its own style, so perhaps just picking a good style would work. I've not seen that myself since I changed it's style and that gets stored in prefs.
The choice might end up a little like the out-of-gamut warning color issue.
Jon, looking great!
I see you've now added some rudimentary stroke to path conversion, so it can erase from stroke. However, if I do a spiral or circle with no fill, it closes the path before erasing, rather than just leaving the outline of the circle/spiral, which is different to the normal conversion to path.
rygle wrote:
...if I do a spiral or circle with no fill, it closes the path before erasing, rather than just leaving the outline of the circle/spiral, which is different to the normal conversion to path.
I've realised that this is doing "union" on the stroke rather than "stroke to path" before erasing, even if the stroked object (circle for instance) has no fill.
1. If I draw a circle, then erase, it fills a circle that had no fill, and the erase path has stroked edges with a white fill. 2. If I draw a circle with no fill, then convert stroke to path, then erase, it merely erases the circumference stroke, but doesn't change the inside of the circle, and the erase path is only visible where the circumference of the circle changed.
This behaviour isn't necessarily bad, it just wasn't what I expected. Perhaps we need a switch that allows you to do one or the other?
On Apr 30, 2008, at 7:09 PM, rygle wrote:
I've realised that this is doing "union" on the stroke rather than "stroke to path" before erasing, even if the stroked object (circle for instance) has no fill.
- If I draw a circle, then erase, it fills a circle that had no
fill, and the erase path has stroked edges with a white fill. 2. If I draw a circle with no fill, then convert stroke to path, then erase, it merely erases the circumference stroke, but doesn't change the inside of the circle, and the erase path is only visible where the circumference of the circle changed.
This behaviour isn't necessarily bad, it just wasn't what I expected. Perhaps we need a switch that allows you to do one or the other?
Aha!!!
It appears to be from the current state of calligraphy tool, or leftover settings.
Sounds like it's something to take care of overall with all settings.
participants (10)
-
unknown＠example.com -
Alexandre Prokoudine -
Bob Jamison -
bulia byak -
Jon A. Cruz -
Josh Andler -
Marcin Floryan -
Maximilian Albert -
Quasar Jarosz -
rygle