cbr at boemann.dk
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?
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
-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
More information about the kimageshop