-
Welcome to B4X forum!
B4X is a set of simple and powerful cross platform RAD tools:
- B4A (free) - Android development
- B4J (free) - Desktop and Server development
- B4i - iOS development
- B4R (free) - Arduino, ESP8266 and ESP32 development
Emulator on desktop
- Thread starter bdiscount
- Start date
- Similar Threads Similar Threads
I've discussed this with Erel before
http://www.b4x.com/forum/showthread.php?t=530
But he hasn't done anything in version 5.5 to improve it. You can always resize the desktop form in the form designer - the device is always correct.
http://www.b4x.com/forum/showthread.php?t=530
But he hasn't done anything in version 5.5 to improve it. You can always resize the desktop form in the form designer - the device is always correct.
Depending on your windows settings the form's size may be slightly incorrect (1-2 pixels).
You can set the form's size under Designer - Tools - Screen Size and increase it.
There are also small differences between the device controls and desktop controls.
You can set the form's size under Designer - Tools - Screen Size and increase it.
There are also small differences between the device controls and desktop controls.
Sorry Erel but it is more than "slightly incorrect (1-2 pixels)"
With a nominal form size of 240 x 264 there are much larger inconsistences with reported and actual client area sizes.
Under Vista
Form1.Width reports 238 : Form1.Height returns 268
Actual Client area width is 229 : Actual Client area height is 266
So this is 11 pixels narrower and 2 pixel higher than nominal and the form properties reflect neither the nominal nor the actual sizes.
Under XP
Form1.Width reports 238 : Form1.Height returns 268
Actual Client area width is 237 : Actual Client area height is 275
So this is 1 pixels narrower and 7 pixels higher than nominal and the form properties also reflect neither the nominal nor the actual sizes.
XP & Vista
The actual Form Designer boundaries are 237 x 267 (excluding the red border) or 239 x 269 (including the red border)
With a nominal form size of 240 x 264 there are much larger inconsistences with reported and actual client area sizes.
Under Vista
Form1.Width reports 238 : Form1.Height returns 268
Actual Client area width is 229 : Actual Client area height is 266
So this is 11 pixels narrower and 2 pixel higher than nominal and the form properties reflect neither the nominal nor the actual sizes.
Under XP
Form1.Width reports 238 : Form1.Height returns 268
Actual Client area width is 237 : Actual Client area height is 275
So this is 1 pixels narrower and 7 pixels higher than nominal and the form properties also reflect neither the nominal nor the actual sizes.
XP & Vista
The actual Form Designer boundaries are 237 x 267 (excluding the red border) or 239 x 269 (including the red border)
I maybe a bit off in this, but the topic's name refer an emulator...
The sicussion is, as I understand it, about the fact that the designer screen is diferent in the device as in the desktop (correct me if I'm wrong)...
Yes, as im most cases the desktop behaves diferently than the device....
I've never had problems regarding placing the controls visualy in either platforms, but I came to realize that it is more secure to place them in code...
If you set the screen resolution to the same as in the device, you still get some diferences in the sizes in some controls like combobox and srollbars...
The problem is, although Basic4ppc is a "cross platform" ( as I call it ), it was primarely created to work in the device, withe the extra ability to code in the desktop....
Except for some special cases, I start by placing the controls in the device and then, when the coding begins to height on battery time, I turn to the desktop... This for me has been the best practice...
I also always keep in mind that, since the native control in Basic4ppc are double pixeled, they might show differently in diferent screen resolutions in the desktop, but still maintain their ratio....
So for me, yes this is an anoyance, but there are few, not that many, other things that complicate our coding than this litle thing...
The sicussion is, as I understand it, about the fact that the designer screen is diferent in the device as in the desktop (correct me if I'm wrong)...
Yes, as im most cases the desktop behaves diferently than the device....
I've never had problems regarding placing the controls visualy in either platforms, but I came to realize that it is more secure to place them in code...
If you set the screen resolution to the same as in the device, you still get some diferences in the sizes in some controls like combobox and srollbars...
The problem is, although Basic4ppc is a "cross platform" ( as I call it ), it was primarely created to work in the device, withe the extra ability to code in the desktop....
Except for some special cases, I start by placing the controls in the device and then, when the coding begins to height on battery time, I turn to the desktop... This for me has been the best practice...
I also always keep in mind that, since the native control in Basic4ppc are double pixeled, they might show differently in diferent screen resolutions in the desktop, but still maintain their ratio....
So for me, yes this is an anoyance, but there are few, not that many, other things that complicate our coding than this litle thing...
A query for Erel.
I uploaded the two screen captures above as PNGs to keep them pixel accurate but they have appeared as JPGs! Does the forum software do an automatic conversion?
I notice that the external dimensions of both captures are the same 245 x 302 but the client areas are different. I suppose that you are taking the nominal size of 240 x 264 and adding some allowance for the frame - although why an odd number for the width I cannot guess - and setting the form height and width. Why not use the ClientSize property of the form to size it correctly?
I uploaded the two screen captures above as PNGs to keep them pixel accurate but they have appeared as JPGs! Does the forum software do an automatic conversion?
I notice that the external dimensions of both captures are the same 245 x 302 but the client areas are different. I suppose that you are taking the nominal size of 240 x 264 and adding some allowance for the frame - although why an odd number for the width I cannot guess - and setting the form height and width. Why not use the ClientSize property of the form to size it correctly?
In fact ClientSize is used on the desktop.
The problem is that MinimumSize and MaximumSize are also set to disallow resizing of the form (by the user).
Setting these values causes the frame size to affect the actual size.
Version 5.8 is soon to come and I will further check this issue.
I don't know about the forum JPG conversion but it sounds like a good idea in order to save some space.
The problem is that MinimumSize and MaximumSize are also set to disallow resizing of the form (by the user).
Setting these values causes the frame size to affect the actual size.
Version 5.8 is soon to come and I will further check this issue.
I don't know about the forum JPG conversion but it sounds like a good idea in order to save some space.
I do most of my coding on the device. I do most of the design on the desktop so I can place controls corectly. Which doesn't look right on the desktop but good on the device. I do use the 239x268 size. The desktop is just a minor annoyance. I would rather see top,left,width and height on the device Then I would do it all on device. I am in no hurry to code as all my coding is just a challenge which I seem to be running out of now.:sign0188: