[CF-Devel] smoothing screenshots

[crossfire-devel-admin at archives.real-time.com]

>>
     
        IT just makes more sense for default values to be zero.
     
     
>
     
     That's what i thought too. Since, by default loader.l put a zero value for
     
     >
     
     smoothlevel.
     
     
This is the right way yes,  I misspoke. But my point being that the
*default* action should be "nothing overlaps me".  If arches without a
specified smoothlevel are assigned smoothlevel 0 then I would want
smoothlevel zero to mean no overlaping this tile (which does not seem to be
the case currently.)
Once again I am not precise enough in my communication, I  mentioned
smoothlevel 255 as a metaphor for this behaviour since it is the highest
smoothlevel which cannot be overlapped (?), not as an actual value for the
arches.

>>
     
      Should
     
     >
     
      >i use your idea but instaed of using level 255 use level 0? If it is we
     
     >
     
      >report the problem to smoothlevel 1 which couldn't spread over
     
     smoothlevel 0
>
     
     
     
I yes this is the right way to do it.  The initial proposal mentioned using
0 as a 'off switch' for smoothing no? That is the behaviour I would like to
see anyway - smoothlevel 0 (or no smoothlevel) means 'do not smooth me' and
'do not overlap me'.  I think this is actually what you are planning to do -
so I'll shutup now.


_______________________________________________
crossfire-devel mailing list
     
     crossfire-devel at lists.real-time.com
     
     
     https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/crossfire-devel