change TouchToPixelPos to return std::pair<int, int>
static_cast (SDL)
various minor style and code improvements
style - PascalCase for function names
made touch events private
const pointer arg in touch events
make TouchToPixelPos a const member function
did I do this right?
braces on barely-multiline if
remove question comment (confirmed in Discord)
fixed consts
remove unused parameter from TouchEndEvent
DRY - High-DPI scaled touch put in separate function
also fixes a bug where if you start touching (with either mouse or touchscreen) and drag the mouse to the LEFT of the emulator window, the touch point jumps to the RIGHT side of the touchscreen; draggin to above the window would make it jump to the bottom.
implicit conversion from QPoint to QPointF, apparently
I have no idea what const even means but I'll put it here anyway
remove unused or used-once variables
make touch scaling functions const, and put their implementations together
removed unused FingerID parameters
QTouchEvent forward declaration; add comment to TouchBegin that was lost in an edit
better DRY in SDL
To do -> TODO(NeatNit)
remove unused include
* Added a context menu on the buttons including Clear & Restore Default
* Allow clearing (unsetting) inputs. Added a Clear All button
* Allow restoring a single input to default (instead of all)
Placing the array wholesale into the header places a copy of the whole
array into every translation unit that uses the data, which is wasteful.
Particularly given that this array is referenced from three different
translation units.
This also changes the array to contain pairs of const char*, rather than
QString instances. This way, the string data is able to be fixed into
the read-only segment of the program, as well as eliminate static
constructors/heap allocation immediately on program start.
Many of the member variables of the thread class aren't even used
outside of the class itself, so there's no need to make those variables
public. This change follows in the steps of the previous changes that
made other kernel types' members private.
The main motivation behind this is that the Thread class will likely
change in the future as emulation becomes more accurate, and letting
random bits of the emulator access data members of the Thread class
directly makes it a pain to shuffle around and/or modify internals.
Having all data members public like this also makes it difficult to
reason about certain bits of behavior without first verifying what parts
of the core actually use them.
Everything being public also generally follows the tendency for changes
to be introduced in completely different translation units that would
otherwise be better introduced as an addition to the Thread class'
public interface.
Keeps the individual behaviors in their own functions, and cleanly
separate. We can also do a little better by converting the relevant IDs
within the core to a QString only once, instead of converting every
string into a std::string.
Disambiguates what the string represents to help translators more easily
understand what it is that they're translating. While we're at it, we
can move the code to its own function, so that we don't need to specify
the same string twice.
Makes the public interface consistent in terms of how accesses are done
on a process object. It also makes it slightly nicer to reason about the
logic of the process class, as we don't want to expose everything to
external code.
Ternary operators have a lower precedence than arithmetic operators, so
what was actually occurring here is "return (out + full) ? x : y" which most
definitely isn't intended, given we calculate out recursively above. We
were essentially doing a lot of work for nothing.
This can cause warnings about static constructors, and is also not ideal
performance-wise due to the indirection through std::function. This also
keeps the behavior itself separate from the surrounding code, which can
make it nicer to read, due to the size of the code.
Qt provides an overload of tr() that operates on quantities in relation
to pluralization. This also allows the translation to adapt based on the
target language rules better.
For example, the previous code would result in an incorrect translation
for the French language (which doesn't use the pluralized version of
"result" in the case of a total of zero. While in English it's
correct to use the pluralized version of "result", that is, "results"
---
For example:
English: "0 results"
French: "0 résultat" (uses the singular form)
In French, the noun being counted is singular if the quantity is 0 or 1.
In English, on the other hand, if the noun being counted has a quantity
of 0 or N > 1, then the noun is pluralized.
---
For another example in a language that has different counting methods
than the above, consider English and Irish. Irish has a special form of
of a grammatical number called a dual. Which alters how a word is
written when N of something is 2. This won't appear in this case with a
direct number "2", but it would change if we ever used "Two" to refer to
two of something. For example:
English: "Zero results"
Irish: "Toradh ar bith"
English: "One result"
Irish: "Toradh amháin"
English: "Two results"
Irish: "Dhá thorthaí" <- Dual case
Which is an important distinction to make between singular and plural,
because in other situations, "two" on its own would be written as "dó"
in Irish. There's also a few other cases where the order the words are
placed *and* whether or not the plural or singular variant of the word
is used *and* whether or not the word is placed after or between a set
of numbers can vary. Counting in Irish also differs depending on whether or not
you're counting things (like above) or counting people, in which case an
entirely different set of numbers are used.
It's not important for this case, but it's provided as an example as to why one
should never assume the placement of values in text will be like that of
English or other languages. Some languages have very different ways to
represent counting, and breaking up the translated string like this
isn't advisable because it makes it extremely difficult to get right
depending on what language a translator is translating text into due to
the ambiguity of the strings being presented for translation.
In this case a translator would see three fragmented strings on
Transifex (and not necessarily grouped beside one another, but even
then, it would still be annoying to decipher):
- "of"
- "result"
- "results"
There is no way a translator is going to know what those sets of words
are actually used for unless they look at the code to see what is being
done with them (which they shouldn't have to do).
We pass a hint to the QPainter instance that we want anti-aliasing on
the compatibility icons, which prevents the circles from looking fairly
jagged, and actually makes them look circular.
NeatNit
Zach Hilman
bunnei
zhupengfei
Lioncash
fearlessTobi