Casper Boemann cbr at
Sun May 22 21:27:00 CEST 2005

On Sunday 22 May 2005 21:11, Boudewijn Rempt wrote:
> On Sunday 22 May 2005 21:07, Casper Boemann wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > With the introduction of infinite selections the extent() or
> > exactBounds() of the selection is no longer enough.
> I may have missed this... Aren't selections auto-extending whenever more
> pixels get selected anymore?
Well, yes

but if you choose a rect and then invert then "everything" is inverted.
what actually happens is the default values of the selection is changed.

But that doesn't change the extent.

> It's really important in many cases to have the absolute exact bounding box
> that contains all selected pixels

No, not as important as you might think. Whats important is the union of 
extents of the paintdevice and the selection.

I could give the box that contains all selected pixel if you want, but as this 
would be:
 -4654368748567, -4667856785654, 56546546456, 546456546546
Do you rally want that ?

I for sure can not think of a case. Some special cases probably exist where 
you want to affect the infinity but those are special cases like invert()

best regards / venlig hilsen
Casper Boemann

More information about the kimageshop mailing list