View Single Post
  #5  
Old 05-05-2011, 03:48 AM
cbk1994 cbk1994 is offline
the fake one
cbk1994's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 10,718
cbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond reputecbk1994 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to cbk1994
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyld View Post
I would not consider this a problem. The GraalControl is movable, therefore it is unwise to assume that it's X and Y will be zero. It's not hard to use relative positioning, or even just saving the position of the control before moving it.
It's a problem because it's not documented and it didn't happen in v5. From what I understand about it, it's also a problem because he's drawing on the tile layer, therefore the coordinates should be relevant to tiles. The only way to fix it would be to add GraalControl.y / 16 to the y you're drawing at, which is nasty if GraalControl's y is not a multiple of 16.

EDIT: This may not be the bug I'm thinking of—it seems to be the same one Tig was having with his level editor, but I thought it was fixed.
__________________
Reply With Quote