I meant your whole code block.
And in fact the original code too (my opinion about the original code I wrote here).
If setDesignResolutionSize() has never been called, then the default design resolution is equal to the frame size. And since the design resolution is equal to the frame size, ResolutionPolicy has no effect.
Yes, I put it incorrectly. While director->setContentScaleFactor(MAX(glview->getFrameSize().width/1280.0f, glview->getFrameSize().height/720.0f));
is the equivalent of your code,
glview->setDesignResolutionSize(1280.0f, 720.0f, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER);
will give you a similar result, but not the full equivalent.
What is the difference?
In the first case, your design resolution is equal to the frame size, ie your coordinate system is equal to the frame size.
On the bright side, you do not need to worry that part of the design resolution will not be visible.
In the second case, the engine will keep your coordinate system equal to the design resolution, and will scale your layout according to ResolutionPolicy.
On the bright side, you do not need to worry about different coordinate systems.
But you need to worry that part of the design resolution will not be visible, and you will need to use getVisibleSize() and getVisibleOrigin(). Because NO_BORDER.
About your case 4, then I believe that the problem is because you use setDesignResolutionSize() and setContentScaleFactor() together.
ResolutionPolicy has effect here in my case. As you can see for 480 * 800 data below,
dpi = 240
Content Scale Factor: 1.000000
FrameSize HW: 480.000000 800.000000
CustUtils: screenHeight, screenWidth: 480.000000, 800.000000
CustUtils: designScreenHeight, designScreenWidth: 720.000000, 1280.000000 (This is I am setting in CustUtils.cpp, Not glview->setDesignResolutionSize(frameSize.width, frameSize.height, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER)
CustUtils: scaleX, scaleY: 1.000000, 0.666667
Bounding HW= 480.000000 853.333374
Image HW= 720.000000 1280.000000
Here by default image size is , 1280 * 720 but getting scaled. After scaling image size is 853 * 480. Since 853 > 800, image is getting cropped width wise.
Though contentScaleFactor is by default 1, but since my previous designResolution was 1280 * 720, it was not working correctly. Do not get confused by glview->setDesignResolutionSize(frameSize.width, frameSize.height, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER); with mu CustUtils.cpp designResolution HW.
Whatever is happening right now is the thing I wanted to achieve.
I meant that if you never called setDesignResolutionSize(), then your design resolution is equal to the frame size and ResolutionPolicy = NO_POLICY.
And if you use glview->setDesignResolutionSize(frameSize.width, frameSize.height, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER), then even though you specified a policy, it is like you did not specify anything in the end. The result is the same.
In the end, you can delete that block of code, nothing will change.
No Border - “The entire application fills the specified area, without distortion but possibly with some cropping, while maintaining the original aspect ratio of the application.”
NO_BORDER - The design resolution will be scaled to fit into the screen size (the frame size), and there will be no distortions, and there will be no black borders, but perhaps a part of the design resolution will not be visible (if the aspect ratio of the design resolution is not equal to the aspect ratio of the frame).
According to the width and height of screen and design resolution to determine the scale factor, choose the larger one as the scale factor. This can make sure that one axis can always fully display on screen, but another may scale out of the screen.
The application and design resolution are different things. If you use NO_BORDER and use setContentScaleFactor() incorrectly, then you can get both black borders and the wrong scale. ResolutionPolicy only works with a design resolution.
Yes, I read your post in other topic in parallel.
But now my mind is too tired and wants to sleep. I will read it carefully tomorrow, okay?
We will add to our docs a lot of info from this thread. How would you all feel about proof-reading a draft once complete? I’ll be working on this over the next few days.
I do not know if this is useful, but I think that a good plan to explain the concept to someone is
There are many different screen resolutions with different aspect ratios.
This raises many questions.
What screen resolutions should we use to create graphics resources? What coordinates should we use to set the position? How to scale resources?
->
What is the design resolution and how one line of code answers these questions.
A few code examples with setDesignResolutionSize(), but without setContentScaleFactor().
Only one set of graphics resources.
->
Why is it a good idea to have multiple sets of graphics resources.
A few code examples with setDesignResolutionSize() and setContentScaleFactor() and setSearchPath().
->
An alternative way. Do not use design resolution, use only setContentScaleFactor().
A few code examples.
If you mean Utils.cpp, then my idea was that if you use it, then you do not need to use glview->setDesignResolutionSize(frameSize.width, frameSize.height, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER). But of course you can do this if you want.
The reason I mentioned glview->setDesignResolutionSize(1280.0f, 720.0f, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER) is that I noticed that your implement the same scaling logic that NO_BORDER. But this is not a full equivalent, I wrote about the difference here.
And I edited this post to avoid confusion.
By the way, if you use Utils.cpp, and do not use setDesignResolutionSize() (or use it like setDesignResolutionSize(frameSize.width, frameSize.height, ResolutionPolicy::NO_BORDER)), then you do not need to worry about visibleOrigin, and getVisibleSize() will always return frame size.