is there a way to find out if "offscreenonly" is enabled?

[evildaddy911]

What is it you are trying to achieve?
a color fading module


What is the problem you are having?
my computer cant draw it fast enough, so it looks really crappy in a loop
Is there a function that tells you if offscreenonly is on?

Describe what you have tried to solve this problem
the documentation keeps saying "Navigation to webpage was cancelled"


Post any relevant code (You may choose to attach the file instead of posting the code if it is too long)
<Answer Here>

Turing:

var see_below : string := "look at the attachment"

Please specify what version of Turing you are using
<Answer Here>

[Dreadnought]

Well, there is no way of determining if an output window is in offscreenonly mode.

But, you could create a separate window ad keep it hidden. Then you just have to draw your gradient to the hidden window, then copy the contents of that window to the window the user sees.

See windowmodule for window commands.

[Tony]

Sure. You can try to draw something to the screen, and see if it appears.

[Zren]

Since only your code will determine if the buffer is offscreen or not, why not just manage a boolean yourself? Tip: Make a procedure to set the variable and call View.Set(...).

[copthesaint]

Its very easy to know if a screen is offscreenonly. If you havnt set offscreenonly then it is Initialized as nooffscreenonly

[Velocity]

you type View.set ("offscreenonly") if you typed it... its there no doubt. assuming you placed it at the very top of your function that you want it to be used for.

[Tony]

Zren @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 4:10 pm wrote:

Since only your code will determine if the buffer is offscreen or not...

Not if other people are using your library/package/whatever

[evildaddy911]

Tony @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:56 pm wrote:

Sure. You can try to draw something to the screen, and see if it appears.

Like

Turing:

drawdot(-15,-15,black) If whatdotcolor(-15,-15)= black then Offscreen:=true

[Tony]

- if the dot gets drawn, it means offscreen is false.
- the screen could have already been black from before, so you'd need to draw twice, and look for that transition
-- which also means that if there's a forked thread, this is not deterministic (which is why forks and offscreenonly don't go together)

Of course you'd have to confirm that whatdotcolor actually reads from screen and not from the buffer into which offscreen draws.

[Dan]

evildaddy911 @ 29th February 2012, 10:36 pm wrote:

Tony @ Wed Feb 29, 2012 3:56 pm wrote:

Sure. You can try to draw something to the screen, and see if it appears.

Like

Turing:

drawdot(-15,-15,black) If whatdotcolor(-15,-15)= black then Offscreen:=true

Tony wrote:

- if the dot gets drawn, it means offscreen is false.
- the screen could have already been black from before, so you'd need to draw twice, and look for that transition
-- which also means that if there's a forked thread, this is not deterministic (which is why forks and offscreenonly don't go together)

Of course you'd have to confirm that whatdotcolor actually reads from screen and not from the buffer into which offscreen draws.

If i rember correctly whatdotcolor and pic.new read from the buffer and not the screen.

[Velocity]

pic.new reads from buffer, whatdotcolor reads from screen

[Dan]

Velocity @ 1st March 2012, 12:15 am wrote:

pic.new reads from buffer, whatdotcolor reads from screen

This does not seem to be true:

Turing:

View.Set("graphics") View.Set("offscreenonly") var y: int := View.WhatDotColor(1,1) Draw.Dot(1,1,y+1); var x: int := View.WhatDotColor(1,1) put y, x;

outputs:

code:

01

If WhatDotColor read the screen it should be 00.

Notice that you will get the same output with "nooffscreenonly", making this method unhelpfull for detecting if "offscreenonly" is on (i.e. evildaddy911's code will allways return true).

[Velocity]

hmm, thats odd. When i tested it, it begged to differ. Oh well, i guess there was something wrong with the way i wrote it. So ofcourse ill take your word over my compilers. Thanks for the clear up, dan.

[Dan]

Velocity @ 1st March 2012, 3:27 pm wrote:

hmm, thats odd. When i tested it, it begged to differ. Oh well, i guess there was something wrong with the way i wrote it. So ofcourse ill take your word over my compilers. Thanks for the clear up, dan.

What was your code? And what does your complier output for the same code i posted?

[Velocity]

yes, it said 00