<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="4">In a LayoutMorph, Z-order does not matter because
as the submorphs are layout in column or row, they never
overlap.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">In the LayoutMorph protocol, it would be better if
all alternatives to addMorph: as addMorphBack, addMorphFront,
etc be be marked as #shouldNoBeImplemented.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">It will clarify the protocol for the users.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">Opinion?<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="4"><br>
</font></p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 11/08/2024 à 01:45, Mark Volkmann
via Cuis-dev a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAFfRWnXgvPZuhBu36gzWYQ0-+e_Sv=jyNWwZE+qHooMnK00dTQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div>Here is where I don't get the claim that addMorphFront and
addMorphBack are all about Z-order.</div>
<div>From this code, for a vertical LayoutMorph, those methods
seem to be all about Y-order</div>
<div>since they control the order of the submorphs array</div>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
GNU Dr. Geo
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gnu.org/s/dr-geo/">http://gnu.org/s/dr-geo/</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gnu-drgeo.blogspot.com/">http://gnu-drgeo.blogspot.com/</a></pre>
</body>
</html>