Re: [Rlib-devel] Re: Buglet in detail layout on first page

[William K. V. <wk...@us...>]

Hello,
On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 16:16, Bob Doan wrote:
> An image on a line or an Image outside of a line?

Humm.. an image on the line causes an under compensation, the
detail rows land in the page footer.  An image outside the line
shows the overcompensation.  Note this is not plain CVS,
in reportgen.c get_output_size I added:
              } else if(rd->type == RLIB_REPORT_PRESENTATION_DATA_IMAGE)
{
                      struct rlib_report_image *ri = rd->data;
                      struct rlib_value rval4, *rval_height=&rval4;
                      rlib_execute_pcode(r, &rval4, ri->height_code,
NULL);
                      if(!RLIB_VALUE_IS_NUMBER(rval_height)) {
                              r_error("RLIB ENCOUNTERED AN ERROR
OBTAINING THE HEIGHT FOR A IMAGE\n");
                      } else {
                              gfloat height =
RLIB_FXP_TO_NORMAL_LONG_LONG(RLIB_VALUE_GET_AS_NUMBER(rval_height));
                              rlib_value_free(rval_height);
                              total += RLIB_GET_LINE(height);
                      }
                }


> One of the "features" in rlib is to have an IMAGE outside of a line, but
> the catch is it doesn't account for Horizontal space.
> 
> On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 13:32 -0600, William K. Volkman wrote:
> > Hello,
> > Just an update. I added the check for the size of an image to the
> > get_output_size routine, added a logo to the page footer, and now
> > am seeing a double compensation for the size of the footer.
> > 
> > On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 11:51, William K. Volkman wrote:
> > <snip>
> > > 
> > > On Sun, 2005-06-12 at 09:17, Bob Doan wrote:
> > > > As of this moment things like this just won't work (And overwrites will
> > > > occur)
> > > > 
> > > > Perhaps the more correct thing to do execute hight changing properties
> > > > before we check to see if "it will fit"
> > > 
> > > Which is one reason why I put made the change to get_output_size,
> > > it is called as part of the "will fit" check (see second stack
> > > trace from GDB below).
> > > 
> > > > I could tackle this one if you don't feel comfortable doing it.  Let me
> > > > know.
> > > 
> > > I don't think that I'm familiar enough with the architecture to be in
> > > a position to judge the "best" way to handle this.  If you want to
> > > tackle it that is fine by me.  The change I made basically works in
> > > the static case albeit not in the most efficient manner and didn't
> > > add support for images (which is one change that I would make, logo
> > > goes in the page footer).