Re: Question about graphics units updating

[Ben Abbott]

On Sep 9, 2010, at 9:32 PM, David Bateman wrote:

> I've been addressing the bug report #30519 as it is necessary to have the 
> legend code working correctly. I started implementing a fix where the 
> position, outerposition, etc values are stored in a particular unit and the 
> get_position, set_position, etc function handles the conversion to the 
> desired units. As I started with the axes and worked down to the root_figure 
> class while implementing this, I didn't notice that the root windows 
> screensize property is already treated, but it instead calls the 
> update_units() method in the set_units() method to natively store the value 
> in the desired units. So that the get_position, set_position, etc methods 
> don't need to be modified.
> 
> Whether one method is better than the other seems to me more a question of 
> taste, and I have essentially all the other unit conversion functions 
> written. However I find it displeasing to use two different techniques to 
> perform the same manipulation of the graphics properties. Is there any reason 
> to pick one method over the other? If so, which? If we can accept that there 
> are two different means of performing this functionality depending on the 
> graphics call then I'm almost ready to push a changeset.
> 
> D.

My preference is that the values be stored in the default units and that 
conversion be done during set(), get(). But either case will work.

More important, I think, is that there is only be one technique for units 
conversion.

Ben