|
|
|
EXPLANATION OF THE KIG DESIGN
|
|
|
|
=============================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Object system
|
|
|
|
----------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Kig Object System is a design I'm particularly proud of. It
|
|
|
|
started out pretty basic, but has undergone some major revisions, that
|
|
|
|
have proven very succesful. Currently, I have just made one more
|
|
|
|
major change, and I think this will be the last majore change to it
|
|
|
|
for quite some time to come. That's also why I'm writing this
|
|
|
|
explanation for other developers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1 ObjectImp's: Basic objects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An ObjectImp represents the current state of an object in Kig. It
|
|
|
|
keeps information about what type of object it is ( e.g. a line, a
|
|
|
|
point, a circle etc. ), and its exact data ( e.g. the center and
|
|
|
|
radius of the circle ). It is *not* in any way aware of how the
|
|
|
|
object was calculated from its parents (e.g. is this a line that is
|
|
|
|
constructed as the parallel of another line, or as the line going
|
|
|
|
through two given points ? ) or how it is drawn on the window (
|
|
|
|
e.g. the thickness of the line, its color etc. ).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is also the notion of BogusImp's in Kig. These are special
|
|
|
|
kinds of ObjectImp's that *only* hold data. They do not represent any
|
|
|
|
real object that can be drawn on a window. Their use is *only* in
|
|
|
|
holding data for other objects to use. Examples are StringImp,
|
|
|
|
IntImp, ConicImp etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are a lot of ObjectImp's in Kig, most of them are in files
|
|
|
|
called *_imp.h and *_imp.cc or *_imp.cpp in the objects subdirectory.
|
|
|
|
Examples are PointImp, LineImp, ConicImp, CircleImp, CubicImp,
|
|
|
|
AngleImp etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is also the concept of ObjectImpType's. These identify a kind
|
|
|
|
of ObjectImp. They carry information about the inheritance among the
|
|
|
|
different ObjectImp types, and some strings identifying them. You can
|
|
|
|
get hold of the ObjectImpType of a certain ObjectImp by using its
|
|
|
|
type() method, you can also get hold of them by name using
|
|
|
|
ObjectImpFactory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2 ObjectCalcer's: calculating ObjectImp's from other ObjectImp's
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An ObjectCalcer is an object that represents an algorithm for
|
|
|
|
calculating an ObjectImp from other ObjectImp's. It is also a node in
|
|
|
|
the dependency graph of a certain document. E.g. a LineImp can be
|
|
|
|
calculated from the two PointImp's it has to go through; every time
|
|
|
|
either of them moves, this calculation is redone. In this case, there
|
|
|
|
would be an ObjectCalcer that keeps a reference to its two parents (
|
|
|
|
the ObjectCalcer's representing the points ), and that will calculate
|
|
|
|
its ObjectImp value every time it is asked to do so ( i.e. every time
|
|
|
|
one of its parents moves.. ).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because of the complex relations that ObjectCalcer's hold to other
|
|
|
|
ObjectCalcer's and to other classes, they have been made
|
|
|
|
reference-counted. This means that they keep a count internally of
|
|
|
|
how much times a pointer to them is held. If this count reaches 0,
|
|
|
|
this means that nobody needs them anymore, and they delete themselves.
|
|
|
|
E.g. an ObjectCalcer always keeps a reference to its parents, to
|
|
|
|
ensure that those aren't deleted before it is deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the inheritance graph of a document, the lowermost objects keep
|
|
|
|
references to their parents and those keep reference to their parents,
|
|
|
|
so that all of the top of the graph is kept alive. Of course, someone
|
|
|
|
needs to keep a reference to the bottommost objects in the graph,
|
|
|
|
because otherwise, the entire graph would be deleted. As we will see
|
|
|
|
later, an external class ( ObjectHolder ) keeps a reference to the
|
|
|
|
ObjectCalcer's that the user is aware of. Thus, the reference
|
|
|
|
counting system makes sure that all the objects that the user knows
|
|
|
|
about, and all of their ancestors are kept alive, and the others die.
|
|
|
|
At the end of the program, this reference is released, and all the
|
|
|
|
objects are deleted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A special case of an ObjectCalcer is the ObjectConstCalcer. This is
|
|
|
|
an ObjectCalcer that has no parents, and only holds some data. The
|
|
|
|
data is held as an ObjectImp of some type, and it will remain
|
|
|
|
constant, and no calculation needs to be done to get it, it is just
|
|
|
|
returned every time it is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other ObjectCalcer's are ObjectPropertyCalcer and ObjectTypeCalcer.
|
|
|
|
ObjectTypeCalcer is a ObjectCalcer that calculates an object according
|
|
|
|
to what a ObjectType object specifies. It basically forwards all
|
|
|
|
calculations to that object ( check below ). An ObjectPropertyCalcer
|
|
|
|
gets data from a property of a certain object. In fact, ObjectImp's
|
|
|
|
can specify property's ( e.g. properties of a circle are its radius,
|
|
|
|
its circumference, its center etc. An angle has its bisector as a
|
|
|
|
LineImp property ), and they are returned as ObjectImp's of an
|
|
|
|
appropriate type. The ObjectPropertyCalcer just gets one of the
|
|
|
|
properties of a certain ObjectImp and stores it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3 ObjectType's: a specification of how to calculate an object.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An ObjectType represents a certain algorithm to calculate an ObjectImp
|
|
|
|
from other ObjectImp's. Unlike an ObjectCalcer, it does not
|
|
|
|
participate in the inheritance graph, and there is only one
|
|
|
|
instantiation of each type of ObjectType. An ObjectTypeCalcer is an
|
|
|
|
ObjectCalcer that keeps a pointer to a certain ObjectType, and
|
|
|
|
forwards all requests it gets to its ObjectType. It's very normal
|
|
|
|
that multiple ObjectTypeCalcer's share the same ObjectType.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are very much ObjectType's in Kig, check out all of the files
|
|
|
|
that end in *_type.* or *_types.* in the objects subdirectory of the
|
|
|
|
Kig source code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.4 ObjectHolder's: a link from the document to the hierarchy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An ObjectHolder represents an object as it is known to the document.
|
|
|
|
It keeps a pointer to an ObjectCalcer, where it gets its data ( the
|
|
|
|
ObjectImp that the ObjectCalcer holds ) from. It also holds
|
|
|
|
information about how to draw this ObjectImp on the window, by keeping
|
|
|
|
a pointer to an ObjectDrawer ( see below ). In its draw method, it
|
|
|
|
gets the ObjectImp from the ObjectCalcer, and passes it to the
|
|
|
|
ObjectDrawer, asking it to draw the ObjectImp on the window.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The document ( check the KigDocument class ) holds a list of these
|
|
|
|
ObjectHolder's. This is its only link with the ObjectCalcer
|
|
|
|
dependency graph. An ObjectHolder keeps a reference to its ObjectCalcer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.5 ObjectDrawer: An intelligent struct keeping some data about how to
|
|
|
|
draw an ObjectImp on screen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An ObjectDrawer is used by an ObjectHolder to keep information about
|
|
|
|
how to draw an ObjectImp on the window. It is really nothing more
|
|
|
|
than a struct with some convenience methods. It does not have any
|
|
|
|
virtual methods, or have any complex semantics. It keeps information
|
|
|
|
like the thickness of an object, its color, and whether or not it is
|
|
|
|
hidden.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2. Interesting Issues
|
|
|
|
---------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here, I explain some parts of the design that may at first look
|
|
|
|
difficult to understand. This part assumes you have read the above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1 Text labels
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Text labels in Kig are designed in a pretty flexible
|
|
|
|
way. I will explain all the classes involved.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1.1 TextImp
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First of all, there is the TextImp class. It is an ObjectImp (
|
|
|
|
cf. supra ), and thus represents a piece of text that can be drawn on
|
|
|
|
the document. It contains a QString ( the text to be shown ), a
|
|
|
|
coordinate ( the location to draw it ), and a boolean saying whether a
|
|
|
|
frame should be drawn around it. As with all ObjectImp's, it does not
|
|
|
|
contain any code for calculating it, or how it behaves on user input.
|
|
|
|
Most of this is handled by the TextType class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1.2 TextType
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The TextType class is an implementation of an ObjectType. It contains
|
|
|
|
code specifying how to calculate a TextImp from its parents, and for
|
|
|
|
how it behaves on user input. A text object has at least three
|
|
|
|
parents, and can handle any number of optional arguments. The three
|
|
|
|
mandatory arguments are an int, which is set to 1 or 0 depending on
|
|
|
|
whether the label needs a surrounding box, a PointImp, containing the
|
|
|
|
location of the text label, and a string containing the text of the
|
|
|
|
label. The text can contain tokens like '%1', '%2' etc. Every
|
|
|
|
additional argument is used to replace the lowest-numbered of those
|
|
|
|
tokens, with its string representation. The function
|
|
|
|
ObjectImp::fillInNextEscape is used for this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For example, if a TextType has the following parents:
|
|
|
|
a IntImp with value 0
|
|
|
|
a PointImp with value (0,0)
|
|
|
|
a String with value "This segment is %1 units long."
|
|
|
|
a DoubleImp with value 3.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This would result in a string being drawn at the coordinate (0,0),
|
|
|
|
with no surrounding box, and showing the text "This segment is 3.9
|
|
|
|
units long.".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All this gives labels in Kig a lot of flexibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 Locuses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Locuses are a mathematical concept that has been modelled in Kig.
|
|
|
|
Loosely defined, a locus is the mathematical tqshape defined by the set
|
|
|
|
of points that a certain point moves through while another point is
|
|
|
|
moved over its constraints. This can be used to define mathematical
|
|
|
|
objects like conics, and various other things. It has been modelled
|
|
|
|
in Kig in the most flexible way I can imagine, and I must say that I'm
|
|
|
|
proud of this design.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2.1 Constrained points
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the implementation of this, we use the concept of constrained
|
|
|
|
points. This is a point that is attached to a certain curve. It is
|
|
|
|
implemented in Kig by the ConstrainedPointType, which takes a CurveImp
|
|
|
|
and a DoubleImp as parents and calculates a Point from these by using
|
|
|
|
the CurveImp::getPoint function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2.2 The Implementation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When a Locus is constructed by the user, Kig receives two points, at
|
|
|
|
least one of which is a Constrained point, and the other one somehow
|
|
|
|
depends on the first. This is checked before trying to construct a
|
|
|
|
Locus, and the user is not allowed to try to construct locuses from
|
|
|
|
other sorts of points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next, Kig takes a look at the ObjectCalcer hierarchy. We look at the
|
|
|
|
smallest part of the hierarchy that contains all paths from the first
|
|
|
|
point to the second point. We then determine all objects that are not
|
|
|
|
*on* one of those paths ( meaning that they are not calculated from
|
|
|
|
the first point, or another object that is on one of those paths ),
|
|
|
|
but that are parents of one or more objects that are on those paths.
|
|
|
|
I call this set of objects the "side of the path" sometimes in the
|
|
|
|
code. The function that finds them is called sideOfTreePath.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Next, an ObjectHierarchy object is constructed, which stores the way
|
|
|
|
to calculate the second point from the first point and the objects
|
|
|
|
from the previous paragraph.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An object is then constructed that has as parent the curve parent that
|
|
|
|
the first point is constrained to, the HierarchyImp containing the
|
|
|
|
ObjectHierarchy from the previous paragraph, and all the objects from
|
|
|
|
the "side of the tree". This new object is an ObjectTypeCalcer with
|
|
|
|
the LocusType as its type. In its calc() function, it calculates a
|
|
|
|
LocusImp by taking the objecthierarchy and substituting all the
|
|
|
|
current values of the objects from the "side of the path", resulting
|
|
|
|
in an ObjectHierarchy that takes one PointImp and calculates another
|
|
|
|
PointImp from that. The LocusImp then contains the new
|
|
|
|
ObjectHierarchy and the current value of the curve that the first
|
|
|
|
point is constrained to. In the drawing function of this LocusImp,
|
|
|
|
points on the curve are calculated, and then the hierarchy is used to
|
|
|
|
calculated from those points the location of the second point. A
|
|
|
|
dynamic feedback algorithm, which has been written with a lot of help
|
|
|
|
from the mathematician "Franco Pasquarelli" is used to determine which
|
|
|
|
of the points on the curve should be used.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2.3 The Rationale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The above explanation may seem very complicated, but I am very much
|
|
|
|
convinced that this *is* the proper way to handle locuses. I will
|
|
|
|
here try explain why I think it is superior to the much simpler
|
|
|
|
implementation that is used by much other programs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The basic alternative implementation involves just keeping a pointer
|
|
|
|
to the first and second point in the locus object, and when the locus
|
|
|
|
is drawn, the first point is moved over all its possible locations,
|
|
|
|
the second point is calculated, and a point is drawn at its new
|
|
|
|
location.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reason I think that this is a bad implementation is that it is not
|
|
|
|
possible to model the real dependency relations properly in this
|
|
|
|
scheme. For example, the locus object would then be made dependent on
|
|
|
|
the constrained point. This is wrong because when the constrained
|
|
|
|
point moves within the limits of the curve constraining it, the locus
|
|
|
|
does by definition not change. Also, if the constrained point is
|
|
|
|
redefined so that it is no longer constrained to any curve, this is a
|
|
|
|
major problem, because it would tqinvalidate the locus. Another point
|
|
|
|
is that in practice, the locus depends on more objects than its
|
|
|
|
parents alone. This is not a good thing, because it makes it
|
|
|
|
impossible to optimise drawing of the objects, using the information
|
|
|
|
about which objects depend on which others, because this information
|
|
|
|
is invalid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reason we need to calculate the "side of the path" above is that,
|
|
|
|
together with the curve that the first point is constrained to, these
|
|
|
|
are the objects that the locus is really dependent on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current Kig system correctly models all dependency relations to
|
|
|
|
the extent possible, while keeping a correct implementation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|