Inkscape

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.
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-tool-added-tp16911185p16912474.html
Sent from the Inkscape - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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.
>>
>>      
>
>

On Sat, Apr 26, 2008 at 9:35 AM, rygle <pittos@...> 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.

-- 
bulia byak
Inkscape. Draw Freely.
http://www.inkscape.org

> -----Original Message-----
> From: inkscape-devel-bounces@... 
> [mailto:inkscape-devel-bounces@...] 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

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.
>
>  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 :)

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:

>  4. 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

> 3. 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@...> 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.

-- 
bulia byak
Inkscape. Draw Freely.
http://www.inkscape.org

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 6:10 PM, Marcin Floryan wrote:
> > 3. 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 7:50 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.

On Apr 28, 2008, at 1:36 PM, Ronan Zeegers wrote:

> I think that a button in the toolbox for the eraser tool is a good  
> idea. But it should just load the calligraphic tool (or his option  
> toolbar) with a different preset and a different boolean mode.
> btw, this boolean mode with an auto union cloud be really helpfull  
> with the calligraphic tool too. It could provid the "paint feeling"  
> that Flash give... It also prevent to have lots of bezier lines  
> when you're using the calligraphic to do a complex draw.

It's probably going to be close to that. Bbyak had already been  
working on such an additive and subtractive options for the  
calligraphic tool. There's a bit of a difference in some use cases,  
and it will be diverging more. From what I can see of things, though,  
the calligraphic tool will be very useful for a different set of  
operations.


> An other thing; it would be really cool to be able to auto switch  
> to the eraser tool when using the eraser of a wacom tablet.

Eeek! You got me!

:-)

Actually with the code in SVN it should be able to do almost that  
already. It should be detecting input devices and switching to the  
last tool used with a given device (tablet mouse/puck, stylus front,  
eraser back), so once you use the eraser end and use it to pick the  
eraser tool, it should switch tools as you go. I've just not tested  
that again recently since I'm on my box running Hardy and that has  
some wacom issues.

And thanks for reminding me. I'll make that tool the default for any  
"ERASER" type extended input device.

On Apr 28, 2008, at 5:40 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

> 1. 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.


> 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).

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.


> 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 :)

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.

On Apr 28, 2008, at 5:56 AM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
>
>>  4. 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

On Apr 28, 2008, at 7:10 AM, Marcin Floryan wrote:

>> 3. 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:
>
>
> >
> > > 3. 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

> 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

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.

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-tool-added-tp16911185p16986634.html
Sent from the Inkscape - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

>  >
>  >  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

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

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?


-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-tool-added-tp16911185p16992790.html
Sent from the Inkscape - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

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.
>
> 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?

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.