[Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
80 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Anthony Walter
While browsing the docs I found:

http://docs.getlazarus.org/#lcl+extgraphics+paintswastika

Do we really need this procedure in the lcl? I think it should probably be removed. If anyone wants to see the details of when it was committed to svn, the inserted revision number is 9692.

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Michael Van Canneyt


On Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Anthony Walter wrote:

> While browsing the docs I found:
>
> http://docs.getlazarus.org/#lcl+extgraphics+paintswastika
>
> Do we really need this procedure in the lcl? I think it should probably be
> removed. If anyone wants to see the details of when it was committed to
> svn, the inserted revision number is 9692.

Besides more recent not so nice connotations, the swastika is an ancient symbol
for the sun and auspiciousness from asia (India, I believe).
I believe the rays are rotated though, compared to the German version.

So maybe first check it, prior to jumping to conclusions.

Michael.

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Marc Santhoff
In reply to this post by Anthony Walter
On Mi, 2016-01-06 at 00:51 -0500, Anthony Walter wrote:
> While browsing the docs I found:
>
> http://docs.getlazarus.org/#lcl+extgraphics+paintswastika

Btw., I only see a header and an empty page ...

> Do we really need this procedure in the lcl? I think it should probably be
> removed.

Additionally to Micheals answer:

Please don't be foolish. Would you want to dispel any star symbol
because the soviet union, satanists and northern korea use(d) a red
star?  This would put the question on "PaintCross" and some more.

One could demand to remove any religious reference, then the name would
have to be changed. Or to filter out any bad words when printing text,
censorship that is.

Please, be tolerant. You're free not to use those procedures or delete
them in your copy.

--
UN*X is sexy!
who | grep -i blonde | date; cd ~; unzip; touch; strip; \
finger; mount; gasp; yes; uptime; umount; sleep


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
One could demand to remove any religious reference, then the name would
have to be changed.
IIRC even "Lazarus" name was discussed at some point as having religious reference.
Which is kind-of is... but to avoid another Phoenix bird named project.

thanks,
Dmitry


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Bart
In reply to this post by Marc Santhoff
On 1/6/16, Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Do we really need this procedure in the lcl? I think it should probably
>> be
>> removed.
>
> Additionally to Micheals answer:
>
> Please don't be foolish. Would you want to dispel any star symbol
> because the soviet union, satanists and northern korea use(d) a red
> star?  This would put the question on "PaintCross" and some more.
>
> One could demand to remove any religious reference, then the name would
> have to be changed. Or to filter out any bad words when printing text,
> censorship that is.

While I agree a similar argument can be made for anything that offends
people there are some differences here.

First f all. Taking offence against a  cross (because of religious
beleives) is not of the same order as taking offence against the
symbol of the Nazi's.
While I am willing to defend each and everyone's freedom of speech,
IMO this does not imply that we (the Lazarus community) should
actively support speading such logo's.
(Nor should we e.g. support bashing of any religion/race etc in our
sourcecode or comments.)

As for the "its an ancient rune" argument: the same thing can be said
for several phrases that now are considered to be offending to e.g.
ethnic groups, and we do not promote these her as well.
Current state is that the Swastika now has very strong associations
witj the Nazi regime and all the evil it stood for.

So, yes, IMVPAPO, it should be removed.

NB. The function was apparently introduced by Seppo (over 9 years ago)

Bart

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Bart <[hidden email]> wrote:

So, yes, IMVPAPO, it should be removed.


Swastika glyph is in Unicode standard. That actually an excuses for having the function available.
(i.e. if a font doesn't support swastika, it could be drawn manually).

thanks,
Dmitry

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

vojtech.cihak
In reply to this post by Marc Santhoff

Hi,

 

I just tested and PaintSwastika always paints clockwise swastika (both religious and nazi symbol).

I vote for keeping procedure but there should be added boolean parameter + patch for painting anti-clockwise swastika (which is religious symbol only).

 

Blaazen

______________________________________________________________
> Od: Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]>
> Komu: <[hidden email]>
> Datum: 06.01.2016 15:54
> Předmět: Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?
>

On Mi, 2016-01-06 at 00:51 -0500, Anthony Walter wrote:
> While browsing the docs I found:
>
> http://docs.getlazarus.org/#lcl+extgraphics+paintswastika


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Bart
In reply to this post by dmitry boyarintsev
On 1/6/16, Dmitry Boyarintsev <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Swastika glyph is in Unicode standard.

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Symbol_in_various_scripts

Bart

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Michael Van Canneyt
In reply to this post by vojtech.cihak


On Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Vojtěch Čihák wrote:

> Hi,
>  
> I just tested and PaintSwastika always paints clockwise swastika
> (both religious and nazi symbol).
> I vote for keeping procedure but there should be added boolean parameter +
> patch for painting anti-clockwise swastika (which is religious symbol only).

I think both rotations are OK for the religious symbol:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika


Michael.
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Marc Santhoff
In reply to this post by Bart
On Mi, 2016-01-06 at 16:31 +0100, Bart wrote:

Look there:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika

> While I am willing to defend each and everyone's freedom of speech,
> IMO this does not imply that we (the Lazarus community) should
> actively support speading such logo's.
> (Nor should we e.g. support bashing of any religion/race etc in our
> sourcecode or comments.)
>
> As for the "its an ancient rune" argument: the same thing can be said
> for several phrases that now are considered to be offending to e.g.
> ethnic groups, and we do not promote these her as well.

Well what about "PaintCross", "PaintFivePointStar",
"PaintFivePointLineStar", "PaintChevron"?

All in the same unit ... has anyone ever used that procedures, what do
the results actually look like?

> Current state is that the Swastika now has very strong associations
> witj the Nazi regime and all the evil it stood for.
>
> So, yes, IMVPAPO, it should be removed.

I'd be with you and support that idea if any star symbol having a
satanistic or stalinistic look would be removed, too.

Go ahead, burn the witch, what's next?

> NB. The function was apparently introduced by Seppo (over 9 years ago)

Who's that? A Nazi, historan or hindu? A joker most probably.

--
Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]>




--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Graeme Geldenhuys-3
In reply to this post by Anthony Walter
On 2016-01-06 05:51, Anthony Walter wrote:
> Do we really need this procedure in the lcl?


This discussion is ridiculous! With thinking like that even the project
name "Lazarus" can't be used. Get real people!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Symbol_in_various_scripts

When I look at that, I see a "running stick figure", or a Ninja throwing
star - I see no problem with either of those. ;-)  I guess it boils down
to what mentality you have.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
In reply to this post by vojtech.cihak
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Vojtěch Čihák <[hidden email]> wrote:

I vote for keeping procedure but there should be added boolean parameter + patch for painting anti-clockwise swastika (which is religious symbol only).


Fair enough.
Here's the patch. (Anyone,) please create a bug report, so it could be applied.

thanks,
Dmitry


Index: extgraphics.pas
===================================================================
--- extgraphics.pas    (revision 51191)
+++ extgraphics.pas    (working copy)
@@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
 procedure PaintRightTriangle(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;
   RadAngle :Extended=0.0);
 procedure PaintSwastika(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;
-  RadAngle :Extended=0.0);
+  RadAngle :Extended=0.0; ClockWise: Boolean = true);
 procedure PaintTriangle(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;
   RadAngle :Extended=0.0);
 procedure PaintTriangular(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;
@@ -583,8 +583,10 @@
 end;
 
 
-procedure InitSwastika(var P:array of TPoint;const R: TRect;var NumPts:Integer);
+procedure InitSwastika(var P:array of TPoint;const R: TRect;var NumPts:Integer; CW: Boolean = true);
 var x1,x2,y1,y2:Integer;
+  t: TPoint;
+  i: integer;
 begin
   x1:=(R.Right-R.Left) div 5;
   y1:=(R.Bottom-R.Top) div 5;
@@ -601,8 +603,21 @@
   P[16].x:=P[15].x;P[16].y:=R.Bottom-y1;P[17].x:=R.Left+x2;P[17].y:=P[16].y;
   P[18].x:=P[17].x;P[18].y:=R.Bottom-y2;P[19].x:=R.Left;P[19].y:=P[18].y;
   NumPts:=20;
+  if not CW then
+    for i:=0 to NumPts -1 do
+      p[i].x:=R.Right - (p[i].x - R.left);
 end;
 
+procedure InitSwastikaCW(var P:array of TPoint;const R: TRect;var NumPts:Integer);
+begin
+  InitSwastika(P, R, NumPts, true);
+end;
+
+procedure InitSwastikaCCW(var P:array of TPoint;const R: TRect;var NumPts:Integer);
+begin
+  InitSwastika(P, R, NumPts, false);
+end;
+
 procedure InitTriangle(var P:array of TPoint; const R: TRect;
   var NumPts:Integer);
 begin
@@ -719,9 +734,12 @@
   InitPolygon(Canvas,PaintRect,RadAngle,@InitRightTriangle);
 end;
 
-procedure PaintSwastika(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;RadAngle :Extended=0.0);
+procedure PaintSwastika(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;RadAngle :Extended=0.0; ClockWise: Boolean = true);
 begin
-  InitPolygon(Canvas,PaintRect,RadAngle,@InitSwastika);
+  if ClockWise then
+    InitPolygon(Canvas,PaintRect,RadAngle,@InitSwastikaCW)
+  else
+    InitPolygon(Canvas,PaintRect,RadAngle,@InitSwastikaCCW);
 end;
 
 procedure PaintTriangle(Canvas: TCanvas; const PaintRect: TRect;RadAngle :Extended=0.0);
 

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

paint_sw.diff (2K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Juha Manninen
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 6:42 PM, Dmitry Boyarintsev
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Fair enough.
> Here's the patch. (Anyone,) please create a bug report, so it could be
> applied.

Dmitry, you have full SVN write access, don't you? You can commit it
without any bug reports.
There could be more variations. Swastika has been drawn standing on
its side, clockwise and counter-clockwise, and standing on its corner.

It has a very long and rich history. It is a nice looking symbol and
for that reason has been so popular during the millenniums.
It is used in Russian Orthodox religion and many other religions
especially in Asia. It has been used in Finnish traditions and art
always. It was a symbol of many military air-forces including Finnish
air-force from its beginning.
And so on ...

>From Bart:
> Current state is that the Swastika now has very strong
> associations witj the Nazi regime and all the evil it stood for.

Then it is time to change that association.
Maybe it is a cultural thing but here most people understand the big
picture and don't judge the symbol itself.
Maybe you and Anthony don't know the history of that symbol? Please study it!
To me your opinions seem very narrow-minded, sorry to say.

Juha

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 12:42 PM, Juha Manninen <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dmitry, you have full SVN write access, don't you? You can commit it
without any bug reports.
There could be more variations. Swastika has been drawn standing on
its side, clockwise and counter-clockwise, and standing on its corner.

I was actually awaiting for someone's else approval to commit :) (r51215)
As for "corner standing" there's already RadAngle parameter.

It has a very long and rich history. ...
And so on ...

Imho, the reason the procedure is there it's because it's quite easy to be drawn.
(Specifically using Polygon method).
ExtGraphics doesn't really have any other religions/cultural symbols there.

thanks,
Dmitry

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Anthony Walter
There are many versions of the religious swastika symbol, but is only one version of the swastika is draw with the squared capped leaves and a stroke width exactly equal to 1/5th of the linear diameter. Guess which one the lcl function draws?


And I've looked at the unicode characters. They don't draw the Nazi swastika, the stroke width and end caps aren't the same, but our lcl version precisely matches the Nazi version.

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Mark Morgan Lloyd
In reply to this post by Juha Manninen
Juha Manninen wrote:

>>From Bart:
>> Current state is that the Swastika now has very strong
>> associations witj the Nazi regime and all the evil it stood for.
>
> Then it is time to change that association.
> Maybe it is a cultural thing but here most people understand the big
> picture and don't judge the symbol itself.
> Maybe you and Anthony don't know the history of that symbol? Please study it!
> To me your opinions seem very narrow-minded, sorry to say.

I'm inclined to agree, particularly since the variant that has such
unpleasant connotations was usually drawn at a 45 deg angle while almost
all other renditions are square (i.e. all elements are either horizontal
or vertical).

There's a general principle that numbers can't be copyrighted or
patented, and that extends to various "illegal numbers" which some trade
bodies and even a few jurisdictions insist can't be published and
shouldn't even be read outside certain narrows contexts. I think this
principle should also extend to simple geometric shapes.

So come on chaps. It's not as though we're talking about something
completely unambiguous like the Waiblingen triple-headed eagle or even
the Penrose Chickens :-)

--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Marc Santhoff
In reply to this post by dmitry boyarintsev
On Mi, 2016-01-06 at 13:07 -0500, Dmitry Boyarintsev wrote:

> ExtGraphics doesn't really have any other religions/cultural symbols there.

Hooray! Let's sing!

"Ding-Dong! The Witch Is Dead"



How about that:

procedure TForm1.PaintBox1Paint(Sender: TObject);
var
  r: TRect;
begin
  r.Top := 0;
  r.Left := 0;
  r.Bottom := 200;
  r.Right := 200;
  PaintFivePointLineStar(PaintBox1.Canvas, r);
end;

Got some silver knifes and black candles at hand?


--
Is sex dirty?  Only if it's done right.
                -- Woody Allen, "All You Ever Wanted To Know About Sex"

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

FivePointLineStar.png (6K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]> wrote:

How about that:

  PaintFivePointLineStar(PaintBox1.Canvas, r);

Got some silver knifes and black candles at hand?

That's the point :) It's FivePointLineStart, not Pentagram. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagram)
It might look the same, but in the end it's FivePointLineStart.

thanks,
Dmitry

--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

dmitry boyarintsev
In reply to this post by Anthony Walter
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Anthony Walter <[hidden email]> wrote:
There are many versions of the religious swastika symbol, but is only one version of the swastika is draw with the squared capped leaves and a stroke width exactly equal to 1/5th of the linear diameter. Guess which one the lcl function draws?

r51217 introduced LineWidth parameter (which should probably be renamed to LeafWidth) that allows to specify a different than default 1/5th diameter.

That also brings the memory of my childhood. Unfortunately I was about 2-3 years old that the event the occurred, so I could not be a witness myself, but...
But a couple of older kids (4-6 years) were left at home for a short period of time (less than an hour or so). However, after a few minutes of playing, they got really scared that the nazis might come in. Being terrified of being captured they took all black markers, pens and pencils they could find at home and started drawing swastikas all over the house. (I cannot confirm if they were the right 1/5th proportion). But in a few minutes all walls in were covered in swastikas.

Despite their hopes and worries, instead of Nazis, parents appeared! They were really mad about what has happened and caused kids to do some labor and cleaning up the mess.

thanks,
Dmitry


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Lazarus] Do we really need a PaintSwastika procedure?

Marc Santhoff
In reply to this post by dmitry boyarintsev
On Mi, 2016-01-06 at 14:50 -0500, Dmitry Boyarintsev wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:45 PM, Marc Santhoff <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> >
> > How about that:
> >
> >   PaintFivePointLineStar(PaintBox1.Canvas, r);
> >
> > Got some silver knifes and black candles at hand?
> >
>
> That's the point :) It's FivePointLineStart, not Pentagram. (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentagram)
> It might look the same, but in the end it's FivePointLineStart.

<ggg>

I see. But from that view: the Nazi symbol is named "Hakenkreuz", not
"Swastika". If you argue like this, you can revert the patch. ;)

--
NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION


--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
1234