Author |
Topic: Graphics "print" command with no parameter (Read 10 times) |
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
 
Posts: 1348
|
 |
Graphics "print" command with no parameter
« Thread started on: Nov 12th, 2014, 11:17am » |
|
According to the LB docs the graphics print command, when no parameter is specified, "scales the graphics based on the size they appear on the display monitor". I interpreted this as meaning that graphics should appear on the printer at approximately the same size as they do on the screen.
But that is apparently not what the LB docs mean - at least it's not what LB 4.04 actually does. It would seem that in practice the command:
Code:
has the same effect as:
Code: #form "print ";DisplayWidth
But it's not what LBB does. The question is, should I modify LBB to be compatible with LB 4.04, or should I leave it doing what it currently does? Advice please.
Richard.
|
|
 Logged
|
|
|
|
SarmedNafi
Junior Member
member is offline
Posts: 93
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #1 on: Nov 12th, 2014, 2:31pm » |
|
In general I can say what I prefer.
I prefer there is a parameter after print command as a percent Number which can control the size of printed graphic, for example 120%, 100%, or 80% and so.
Regards
Sarmed
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #2 on: Nov 12th, 2014, 2:48pm » |
|
on Nov 12th, 2014, 2:31pm, Sarmed Nafi wrote:I prefer there is a parameter after print command as a percent Number which can control the size of printed graphic, for example 120%, 100%, or 80% and so.
|
|
I don't understand what you mean - percentage of what?
Anyway I am not proposing any changes to the forms of the command which take a parameter, such as 'print vga' or 'print 800'. They are used very commonly, and are of course already compatible with LB.
My query is only about the variant of the command which has no parameter, which is not commonly used. Do you think that it should be modified to be compatible with LB or not?
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Rod
Full Member
member is offline
Gender: 
Posts: 110
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #3 on: Nov 12th, 2014, 9:15pm » |
|
Not that well known. The Liberty default is to use the DisplayWidth as the size. Most often this results in a small print size as most folks open a window smaller than the DisplayWidth.
So for conformity you should use DisplayWidth. Perhaps a more natural default choice would be WindowWidth but that would be an obvious break from tradition but would always print stuff full page.
Few folks understand the power of the SIZE parameter.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Richard Russell
Administrator
member is offline
Posts: 1348
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #4 on: Nov 12th, 2014, 10:04pm » |
|
on Nov 12th, 2014, 9:15pm, Rod wrote:| The Liberty default is to use the DisplayWidth as the size. |
|
I guess Carl made that decision when all screens were roughly 4:3 in shape, most had a relatively low resolution (maybe 800 x 600) and when full-screen programs were common. It makes less sense in an environment of widescreen HD-resolution (or higher) screens.
Quote:| So for conformity you should use DisplayWidth. |
|
OK the consensus, so far at least (taking into account replies at the Yahoo! group), seems to be that I should change LBB to be compatible.
Richard.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
net2014
New Member
member is offline
Posts: 37
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #5 on: Nov 13th, 2014, 09:42am » |
|
I would suggest conformity with LB4 if possible, too many differences are not easy to remember and we all know that 'reading the manual' is often the last or forgotten resort!
Richard, thanks for your continued support.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tsh73
Full Member
member is offline
Gender:
Posts: 210
|
|
Re: Graphics "print" command with no par
« Reply #6 on: Nov 13th, 2014, 8:11pm » |
|
I would vote for being compatible.
And yes, thanks for working on LBB.
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
