The height of the edit file name in more than 7.56a

Bug reports will be moved here when the described bug has been fixed

Moderators: white, Hacker, petermad, Stefan2

User avatar
gora
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2010-12-17, 10:37 UTC
Location: Russian

Post by *gora »

ghisler(Author) wrote:I don't know which is better - it's up to you to decide.
gora wrote:In version 8 all was normal for me. Return as was in version 8, please.
Sob
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 941
Joined: 2005-01-19, 17:33 UTC

Post by *Sob »

There are clearly two things:

1) different heights in 32-bit and 64-bit TC - they of course should be the same and have the right height
2) the matter of what right height is

It seems to me that you complain about 1), because beta 9 broke it again. I'm after 2).

I wrote simple application to test if we're seeing the same sizes. It looks like this:

http://web.hisoftware.cz/sob/download/edit-height-test.png

Left column consists of sample edits with heights from font_weight+0 to font_weight+10. The used font can be set above, to compare with TC settings. The other two columns are screenhots of the first one from Windows 7 with Aero and Classic themes. So it's possible to compare if it looks the same as the first column (for default Microsoft Sans Sefif 8). I can't imagine it could have different heights (with exception of different DPI settings - I use defaults everywhere).

Rename edit heights I see in TC:

- TC 7.56a = +5
- TC 8.0 beta 5 (with differences between 32/64)
- 32-bit = +5
- 64-bit = +8
- TC 8.0 beta 6 (after making height the same - but still have problems with some font combinations)
- 32-bit = +5
- 64-bit = +5
- TC 8.0 beta 8 (new algorithm for calculating the height, does not depend on main window font)
- 32-bit = +4
- 64-bit = +4
- TC 8.0 beta 9
- 32-bit = +6
- 64-bit = +8

Now what the right height is. I believe it's +6 (*1). With +4 I was seeing in beta 8 there was no space between the text and borders when using Classic theme. With Aero and other themes, edits have only 1px borders (as compared to 2px in Classic) so there was 1px space there and it didn't look bad. But even with Aero, +6 looks better, because it makes the space 2px, which is the same as left space and if you look at higher edits (+7 and above), you can see the top space always being 2px, so I take it as the best value.

There's of course the question how it's possible that my +6 is different from TC's +6. If you could run my test application and check what you see (screenshots welcome), it might perhaps bring some clues (e.g. if it's system-dependent).

http://web.hisoftware.cz/sob/download/edit-height-test.7z (contains 32-bit Delphi 5 version and 64-bit Lazarus version)
http://web.hisoftware.cz/sob/download/edit-height-test-src.7z (source)

--
(*1) it is actually computed value, it just happens that it was 6 with all themes so far
Last edited by Sob on 2011-11-14, 15:57 UTC, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
gora
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2010-12-17, 10:37 UTC
Location: Russian

Post by *gora »

2Sob
I don't know that to you will give my screenshots, but here they:
http://gora.7zsfx.info/test/capture_001_14112011_152015.png
http://gora.7zsfx.info/test/capture_003_14112011_152209.png
It is in my opinion better to use +4 since it is necessary to remember also about the next line on the panel which is partially closed at the big height of edit box.
Sob
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 941
Joined: 2005-01-19, 17:33 UTC

Post by *Sob »

gora wrote:I don't know that to you will give my screenshots, but here they:
I just want to be sure that we're seeing the same sizes. Can you also confirm that you see the same sizes in TC as I do (+4 in beta 8 and +6/8 in beta 9 32/64)? Because it would mean that although author is settings some value, there must be something adding another 2px.
It is in my opinion better to use +4 since it is necessary to remember also about the next line on the panel which is partially closed at the big height of edit box.
It really depends on used font. With default Microsoft Sans Serif 8, even +6 edit *with correct vertical position* does not hide any part of text in line above or below. With Segoe UI 9 even +4 edit hides few pixels (with texts like "gyq" above or "ĚŠČÁ" below).
User avatar
gora
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2010-12-17, 10:37 UTC
Location: Russian

Post by *gora »

Fixed in 8.0β10.
User avatar
ghisler(Author)
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 48021
Joined: 2003-02-04, 09:46 UTC
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Post by *ghisler(Author) »

Did you check both the 32-bit and 64-bit version?
Author of Total Commander
https://www.ghisler.com
User avatar
gora
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2010-12-17, 10:37 UTC
Location: Russian

Post by *gora »

ghisler(Author) wrote:Did you check both the 32-bit and 64-bit version?
Yes! Both the 32-bit and 64-bit version is OK. :)
User avatar
Flint
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 3487
Joined: 2003-10-27, 09:25 UTC
Location: Antalya, Turkey
Contact:

Post by *Flint »

Confirm, the 32- and 64-bit versions now show identical rename boxes, and both with correct sizes. Tested with several different fonts, did not notice any significant problems (of course, except for the gap at the beginning which is unfixable at the moment).
Flint's Homepage: Full TC Russification Package, VirtualDisk, NTFS Links, NoClose Replacer, and other stuff!
 
Using TC 10.52 / Win10 x64
Sob
Power Member
Power Member
Posts: 941
Joined: 2005-01-19, 17:33 UTC

Post by *Sob »

I like it too. :)

Well, if I wanted to nitpick, it still doesn't have the best vertical position (1px up would be better, because the text would not move down that way), but as it's just one pixel and it's the same as it was for the long time before and I didn't mind it back then, I'll be quiet. ;)
Post Reply