<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
<meta name="generator" content="pandoc" />
<title></title>
<style type="text/css">code{white-space: pre;}</style>
</head>
<body>
<p>Hi David,</p>
<p>I honestly do not know how to define a sensible range, nor how the thoughts expressed in this email will play out from a user’s <em>point-of-view</em>.. so the thoughts raised are nothing more than thoughts as the pop into my head while typing.</p>
<p>They thoughts might do more harm than good to be honest.. I am not really a <em>GUI</em> guy. <code>;-)</code></p>
<p>On 2016-11-02 18:54, David Fuhrmann wrote:</p>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<pre><code> Yes, this was the main reason, but I’m not sure what is the best
way. Of course we can think about more sensibly defining „good
limits“. I think a slider ranging from INT64_MIN to INT64_MAX - 1
just does not make much sense.
After I looked at some ranges, It seems we define them quite
diversely, ranging from small ranges, to something like
[0,INT32_MAX].
On the other hand, the current code does not support values >
sizeof(int) at all, as the controls store use int for the getters
and setters.</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Even though the control itself does not support values that are not in the range <code>(INT_MIN, INT_MAX)</code>, the controls can still be used to select a value as long as the absolute difference between <em>min</em> and <em>max</em> is less than the distance between <code>INT_MIN</code> and <code>INT_MAX</code>.</p>
<p>The above assumes that it is possible for the slider to have one internal range, but the value displayed to the user being outside of that range.</p>
<p>As an example, having a range from <code>(INT64_MAX-1024, INT64_MAX)</code> could normalize the value, since <code>0</code> to <code>1024</code> can be represented in an <code>int</code>, the slider internally uses the absolute range (in terms of difference) but the users sees <code>INT64_MAX+x</code> (where <code>x</code> is the sliders internal value).</p>
<blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;color:#500050">
<pre><code> What is your opinion about that topic?</code></pre>
</blockquote>
<p>Even though it might not <em>“make sense”</em> to display a slider for a range such as <code>(INT64_MIN+1, INT64_MAX)</code> (as this range is far too large to yield any accurate precision) I think the easiest solution is to simply display a slider as long as the range fit within the requirements of the slider control.</p>
<p>It is very hard to come up what a <em>“sensible range”</em> corresponds to, so the safest bet <em>could</em> be to just to display it as a slider, if it can be displayed as a slider.</p>
<p>Another idea would be to have the slider work in steps larger than 1 for ranges that does not fit in the <em>slider-control</em> directly (given that the user can explicitly adjust the value if the slider does not yield accurate enough precision).</p>
</body>
</html>