Revolution Test Page
(non-functional spam-avoiding link on JPG)
Revolution Test Stacks
| Revolution-Teststacks | 80 KB (zip) |
Following the recent discussion about the "RevTable bug" (Bugzilla 2019) and Standalone Builder problems (Bugzilla 2217) on the improve-revolution list (August/September, 2004) I add two stacks and a readme file for interested testers of the Revolution IDE that demonstrate the bugs and related problems with stacks that contain larger number number of controls, especially larger number of fields. Details - i.e. the complete bug reports of Bugzilla 2019 and 2217 - are to be found by clicking the "readme"-buttons of the test stacks, which however when opened in the Rev environment need some time to display the contents of the connected field in the larger 3300-fields stack that may bring down the Revolution IDE almost to freezing point on medium-fast computers. Read below what has been fixed in the meantime: All the described problems do not appear when the stacks are opened in the Metacard IDE. You can test this by downloading the Metacard IDE (1.4 MB zipped) from here. Thanks to the continued efforts to improve Revolution some of the described problems have now been resolved with version 2.5.1. (March 2005). The speed of the test stack is now almost identical in both environments with even a small advantage for Revolution - when run in the development environment.. However, the problem of building a standalone of this stack unfortunately has not dealt with successfully even with Revolution version 2.6 (June 2005). Building the standalone in the Rev IDE takes "forever", whereas building a standalone of the test stack with the Metacard "Standalone Builder" takes less than a second. (see comments in Bugzilla 2217). Version 2.7-GM-1 of Revolution (February 2006) has also not yet resolved this standalone-building problem. |
My mail to the Metacard and use-revolution lists of Dec. 29, 2004
Subject: problem with field borderwidth 2
To: metacard@lists.runrev.com
use-revolution@lists.runrev.com
A stack developed with Metacard 2.5 contains several rows of
adjacent fields - with the default borderwidth of 2 when the stack was created.
The adjacent fields are placed relative to each other in such a way that the
borders form smooth vertical and horizontal lines between the fields, giving
the impression of a "net" in which the fields are embedded. The
fields are on top of an image (which is intended to become visible when the
fields are removed one by one when working with the stack).
The horizontal and vertical "lines" show as intended until engine
version 2.5.1B3 (Metacard reading).
From engine version 2.6.1 on - corresponding to Rev 2.5 and
later - suddenly the underlying image shines through between the fields although
they have not been moved.
Setting the borderwidths of the fields to 1 or 3 restores the "lines"
between the fields - now of course of different width - and the image is no
longer visible.
Setting the field borders back to the default width of 2 lets the image shine
through the fields again.
This is on WindowsXP and holds both for the Rev and Metacard IDEs, meaning it is an engine problem.
Has anybody else noticed this or can verify my observation?
--Wilhelm Sanke
<www.sanke.org/MetaMedia>
Meanwhile - as of Dec.30, 2004 - I found out that the problem of suddenly transparent borders (with a borderwidth of two pixels) does not occur on MacOS, but only on WindowsXP (I did not test on Windows 98 or 2000). Settings of "Focus Border" or "showfocusborder" do not solve the problem.
I created a test stack with Revolution 2.5 (engine version - the "version" - 2.6.2.A2) and tested it with Rev 2.5. and Rev 2.1.2 - and other versions between.
Download test stack "Fieldborder Test" here (zip-file 40 KB).
With Rev 2.1.2 and borderwidth 2 for the fields the borders are displayed as they should with their vertical and horizontal "lines"
With Rev 2.5. and later than 2.1.2 the stack looks like this; the "transparent" borders that appear at a borderwidth of 2 can be seen in the snapshot on the right.
 |
 |
and with borderwidth 3 like this:
