[Scilab-users] question on graphic children order

[Samuel Gougeon]

Le 10/04/2019 à 18:05, Federico Miyara a écrit :
>
> Stéphane,
>
> Thank you for your insight.
>
> I think I've found a possible explanation fromthe user's point of 
> view: If several entities are successively added and some of their 
> properties need to be modified on the fly, it is easier to use a 
> single instruction that affects the newly added entity instead of 
> having to keep track of the index or the handle of each specific 
> entity. I suppose it is more frequent to modify the most recently 
> added object than a deeply buried one.

I don't think it is the reason (if there is any true reason). It is 
equally easy to get the handle with
A...children($)
A...children(1)
gce()

Thanks for your persistent will to know why, for things that are 
actually not the most handy, even if after years we are compelled to do 
with them.
To have fresh observers and comenters is often interesting. To have new 
contributors as well.

After the first interesting Stéphane's attempt, i am also afraid that 
changing the order now would break a lot of code.
However, IMO it would be worthwhile to try, and see how many tests this 
change breaks.
Many graphical tests are interactive, that requires more manpower 
(because these tests have no "automatic" validation/invalidation. A 
human must see how graphics are rendered and say "the test passes, or 
fails")
But this is easy to do, and subscribers to this list could contribute.

Samuel

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.scilab.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20190410/56458b9e/attachment.htm>