-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 419
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Bug fix: add "reshape" functionality to utility viewer #322
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The
SceneGraph::Camera
class can handle aspect ratio preservation in thesetViewport()
call automatically -- you only need to call Camera::setAspectRatioPolicy() with a desired value.Looking at the code, here it's set to
NotPreserved
for some reason, which effectively disables such handling.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see. Good to know. I do not know the purpose either. Will mark it, and solve it in recent "sensor/camera redesign" project (See slack for more details. Hope you can participate in this project. :-) )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, I commented here because doing it via
setAspectRatioPolicy()
would result in less code overall. Merging this as-is just piled up more unnecessary tech debt in my opinion.NotPreserved
is the default, and it probably makes sense for rendering headless -- there you have no arbitrary framebuffer resizes anyway. But having that there doesn't prevent the viewer from redefining it to handle this differently when having a GUI.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Completely agree with @mosra . There is no reason to keep the
NotPreserved
here and add extra code to implement behavior we could achieve by just changing the flag. Let's have a followup PR to remove the extra code + extra comments, and just switch the flag instead.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was thinking when @msavva wrote it, he must have some reasons, so I was trying to respect that by not touching it, and leaving it to the future discussion.
But since he also leans towards changing it now, I am happy to write a new PR to roll back this one, and fix the issue in the other way.