JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CCPNMR Archives


CCPNMR Archives

CCPNMR Archives


CCPNMR@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CCPNMR Home

CCPNMR Home

CCPNMR  March 2012

CCPNMR March 2012

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: Markers in Windows 2.1.5

From:

Richard Harris <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

CcpNmr software mailing list <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 12 Mar 2012 19:16:55 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (115 lines)

Thanks Wayne

Have noticed another 'feature'. Its a problem with using keyboard shortcuts after you type in a chemical shift value in the bottom left hand corner of the 3D window to select a specific plane. The typing cursor stays in where you type in the number - so if you now try to type 'm' for mark in the spectrum itself then it just goes into the chemical shift part and does not create a mark, the only way I found I could use the keyboard shortcuts was to close the 3D window completely and re-open it.

Richard
________________________________________
From: CcpNmr software mailing list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Wayne Boucher [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 2:32 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Markers in Windows 2.1.5

OK, I've figured it out.  It turns out that the way Windows handles the
x,y coordinates of events when you have multiple strips is completely
different than in Unix, and in particular you get the x, y of the point
relative to the top left of the window rather than relative to the strip
top left.

So we added a function just for Windows which corrects for this.  It
corrects for y by subtracting off the height of the toolbar (already
something that worries me).  It corrects for x by figuring out which strip
you are in (if there is more than one) and subtracting off the relevant
number for this (which can only be obtained by looking at where the point
is relative to the top left of the screen).

This was missing logic to exactly deal with the case when the mark was in
the last strip, so the x was coming out relative to the top left of the
screen instead of relative to the top left of that last strip.

Anyway, this will be fixed in the next (2.2.2) release.  If you can figure
out how to edit the code (you probably need Administrator priviliges) then
in the file ccpn/python/ccpnmr/analysis/frames/WindowFrame.py look for the
function modifyKeyEvent() and you'll see:

     else:
       for col in range(ncols-1):
         canvas = canvases[0][col+1]
         #print 'modifyKeyEvent: in x loop:', col, x, canvas.winfo_rootx()
         if x < canvas.winfo_rootx():
           canvas = canvases[0][col]
           x = x - canvas.winfo_rootx()
           break
       else:
         canvas = canvases[0][ncols-1]
         x = x - canvas.winfo_rootx()

where the bottom three lines are extra (i.e. the fix).  Your email client
has probably mashed the indentation: that final "else:" should be lined up
with the "for" (i.e. the "e" in the same column as the "f"), and the other
two lines indented two spaces extra relative to that.

Further down the y also needs changing:

     else:
       for row in range(nrows-1, 0, -1):
         canvas = canvases[row-1][0]
         #print 'modifyKeyEvent: in y loop:', col, y, canvas.winfo_rooty()
         if y < canvas.winfo_rooty():
           canvas = canvases[row][0]
           y = y - canvas.winfo_rooty()
           break
       else:
         canvas = canvases[0][0]
         y = y - canvas.winfo_rooty()

So again the three lines at the bottom are extra.

Wayne

On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Richard Harris wrote:

> Hi Wayne
>
> Yes that is what I am seeing just the last (righthand most) strip window - I didn't realise that the vertical portion of the mark was offset.
>
> richard
>
> ________________________________________
> From: CcpNmr software mailing list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Wayne Boucher [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 1:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Markers in Windows 2.1.5
>
> One other thing I just noticed.  In the last strip, it is in fact creating
> a proper mark, both horizontal and vertical, it's just that the vertical
> one is at some semi-random (unintended) location, i.e. not where you
> clicked, so you just don't see it on the screen.
>
> Wayne
>
> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Wayne Boucher wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Just trying it now, it looks like the Marks are created ok except for the
>> rightmost strip (when there is more than one strip), is that what you are
>> seeing, or is it not working for any set of strips.  (So one of the weird
>> things is that it is working ok for me if there are no strips.)
>>
>> Wayne
>>
>> On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Richard Harris wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All
>>>
>>> I think there might be a bug in the 2.1.5 Windows version.
>>> When putting a Mark on a spectrum in a 3D window that is not H(x), N(y) it
>>> seems to only draw a horizontal line rather than a full mark. I've seen
>>> this behaviour in both a H(x), H(y), N(z) and H(x), C(y), N(z) windows, but
>>> it marks fine in the orthogonal windows - H(x), N(y), C/H(z) windows.
>>>
>>> Richard
>>
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager