Skip to content

FX2D display is inverted in 3.0b6 #3795

Closed

Description

@monkstone

oops

Activity

  1. knupel commented on Sep 13, 2015

    @knupel

    same on OSX 10.9.5

    void setup() {
      size(300,300,FX2D) ;
    }
    void draw() {
      background(0) ;
      text("test",80,80) ;
    }
    
  2. jacbouzada commented on Sep 13, 2015

    @jacbouzada

    Same problem in OS X 10.10.5

  3. adegani commented on Sep 13, 2015

    @adegani

    Same problem (Linux). Processing-3.0b5 was OK!

  4. changed the title [-]FX2D display is inverted in processing-3.0b6 (well on linux at least)[/-] [+]FX2D display is inverted in 3.0b6[/+] on Sep 14, 2015
  5. added
    criticalHighest possible priority for the next release
    on Sep 14, 2015
  6. brendanmatkin commented on Sep 14, 2015

    @brendanmatkin

    confirm 10.10.5

  7. JakubValtar commented on Sep 14, 2015

    @JakubValtar
    Contributor

    For now, use noSmooth() in your setup() as a workaround. It looks like FX has buggy antialiasing in 8u60.

  8. benfry commented on Sep 15, 2015

    @benfry
    Contributor

    Found a workaround for 3.0 beta 7.

  9. reopened this on Sep 15, 2015
  10. benfry commented on Sep 15, 2015

    @benfry
    Contributor

    Nuts... maybe not. Think I was fooled by this retina display.

  11. 2 remaining items

  12. added this to the 3.0 final milestone on Sep 17, 2015
  13. JakubValtar commented on Sep 18, 2015

    @JakubValtar
    Contributor

    I know you secretly wish we could get away with 2), I also do, but we are too nice for that. I would otherwise vote for 3), but I'm afraid it will be messy and people will break it (they always do). So, my proposal is:

    We want most people to have antialiasing, so let's bundle 8u51 with the release so there is no compromise for majority of end users.

    It also has to run on all recent JREs, so let's also disable smoothing for 8u60 + OS X & Linux combos and print warning that FX in 8u60 does not smooth if people try to enable it. And it's just a few lines of code so there is not much we can break. This covers developers & people who like to run sketches with different JREs (i.e. me & me). These people have enough knowledge to install 8u51 or switch renderer if they can't live without smoothing.

  14. benfry commented on Sep 18, 2015

    @benfry
    Contributor

    2 is the worst of the bunch, I think the third is cleanest/best if it actually works, followed by the fourth. Or maybe 4 and 1.

  15. JakubValtar commented on Sep 18, 2015

    @JakubValtar
    Contributor

    As I said, 3 will be messy and hard to get right and 4 alone has too broad impact. So I'm for 4+1 since 1 is really easy and will give smoothing to the masses and 4 covers devs.

    (And I believe in case of 1 you can build with 8u60, but the ant script has to package in downloaded 8u51).

  16. jacbouzada commented on Sep 18, 2015

    @jacbouzada

    One vote for the 3rd option ;)
    (but I don't know how messy/hard it would be....)

  17. benfry commented on Sep 18, 2015

    @benfry
    Contributor

    3 is too messy and will introduce more bugs than it fixes.

    Going with 4 and 1 for the next release.

  18. added
    cantfixThis issue is out of our control
    and removed
    cantfixThis issue is out of our control
    on Sep 18, 2015
  19. tillnagel commented on Sep 25, 2015

    @tillnagel

    Just to let you know, I updated the Wiki page on how to build Processing to reflect this latest change. https://github.com/processing/processing/wiki/Build-Instructions

  20. monkstone commented on Oct 21, 2015

    @monkstone
    ContributorAuthor

    Hi just to note @benfry problem does not seem to be resolved with recently released jdk1.8.0_66-b17

  21. benfry commented on Oct 22, 2015

    @benfry
    Contributor

    Yep, I don't expect it until 8u80.

  22. benfry commented on Feb 13, 2016

    @benfry
    Contributor

    Fixed in 8u72, and Processing 3.0.2 will ship with 8u74 so we're all set on this one.

  23. locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators on Sep 4, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

criticalHighest possible priority for the next releaseknown

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

    Milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions