Illustrator rounds everything up

Hi everybody,
I'm on the verge of losing my mind, so before i do so, I figured I'd ask a bit of help around.
Here is my problem:
I am working on a design, and at some point i must have changed some settings, and I am now unable to enter any decimal value for my contours, for the width, the length etc.
Everytime I do so, it just rounds everything up:
For example: when I type anything from 0,1 to 0,9 it just rounds up to 1,
When I type 1,2pt, illustrator rounds it off at 1 pt
When I type 1,5, illustrator rounds it off at 2pt
And so forth for ANY decimal number I try to enter.
I looked on the internet, and this is not a problem of full stop or comma, i've tried them both.
The weird thing though is that there are a few boxes I made earlier this evening with a contour of 0,25pt, and those one were not affected by the changement of settings (or whatever I did or happened), and i can modify them as I want, putting in any value such as 1,2; 1,25; etc.
Only the new elements i create seem to be affected.
Other interesting fact, when I create a new document, the problem is the same HOWEVER when i create a document based on one of illustrator's template, there is no problem anymore !
WOuld any of you have an idea to help me ?
I'd be really grateful,
Thank you in advance,
SImon.

Turn off the option "align to pixel grid" (see transform panel (and its panel menu. You have to set this for the file and for existing objects.

Similar Messages

Help! Illustrator duplicates everything on drag, as if I'm holding down the Option key.

I have never had this problem before. Whenever I drag an object, it automatically duplicates the object as if I am holding down the Option key. I can move objects with the arrow keys, but if I drag anything with the mouse, it automatically duplicates it.
Please help as this is impossible to work with. I've restarted the coputer as well as Illustrator multiple times. The issue does not happen in InDesign or Photoshop. Just Illustrator. I'm runnin Mac OSX 10.6.
Thank you in advance for your help.

Thank you for your remply emil! It happens when I create a new document with new objects, and it also happens on already existing documents and objects. Yes, the cursor swithces to the double arrows as if I was holding down the Option key. Nothing wrong with the key itself. IT's not stuck or anything.

How to stop Illustrator from rounding corners of my shapes using brush tool

Trying to draw a skull eye but everytime I finish the shape, Illustrator rounds the corners into s semi-circle. Arrggh!! I am sure there is a setting I have been unable to find that could rectify this. Can someone please direct me to where this is? Im using CS6. Thanks in advance.

The typical brush tool with default settings and there was also a brush called lineart. This is partly tied to my last question I posted where sketeches werent coming out the way I wanted. The shapes are being "auto-rounded" as soon as I finish the shape.

Illustrator CS6 64-bit Crashes When Opening Files

This is a problem that has been plaguing me since I moved to CS6 64-bit (on a Windows 7 machine). I've only seen it in Illustrator:
Seemingly randomly once or twice a week, I will click on an AI file in Windows Explorer to open it, and Illustrator will crash to the desktop. There is no consistency to the files that I've been able to find. Some are local to my hard drive, and some are on the network. It could be a file I've opened several times the same day already or a file I haven't opened in months. I restart Illustrator and everything's fine— I can access the file, no problem.
The only trait that I have sussed out is that it seems to happen more frequently if I've left the computer idle for 20 minutes or so, which is well below the sleep time-out for my hard drive. It's almost like Illustrator doesn't know how to wait for a file if the file isn't immediately available. (The files are not open elsewhere.) I've read that Illustrator is cranky with files on network locations, but this happens more frequently with local files.
Program files are loaded from an SSD, but the scratch disk is my local HD and my files are stored on the HD. My scratch disk was originally the SSD, but the problem occured almost every day under that configuration. Moving the scratch disk to the HD made the crashes occur less frequently.
The event log for yesterday's crash doesn't seem to be particularly helpful. (Posted below.)
Is this behavior familiar to anyone? I have been searching Adobe's forums and the web in general with no luck for the last year. My apologies if this has been addressed elsewhere in the forums and I haven't found it.
Thanks in advance for any advice!
Log Name:      Application
Source:        Application Error
Date:          6/26/2013 2:38:35 PM
Event ID:      1000
Task Category: (100)
Level:         Error
Keywords:      Classic
User:          N/A
Description:
Faulting application name: Illustrator.exe, version: 16.0.3.691, time stamp: 0x50bb31df
Faulting module name: Illustrator.exe, version: 16.0.3.691, time stamp: 0x50bb31df
Exception code: 0xc0000005
Fault offset: 0x000000000066d8c8
Faulting process id: 0x1030
Faulting application start time: 0x01ce72527a68524e
Faulting application path: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Illustrator CS6 (64 Bit)\Support Files\Contents\Windows\Illustrator.exe
Faulting module path: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Illustrator CS6 (64 Bit)\Support Files\Contents\Windows\Illustrator.exe
Report Id: 9b76be3b-de8f-11e2-b99d-00259049948b
Event Xml:

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give that a shot... but wouldn't other applications be experiencing the same thing? I open Photoshop files all day and it's never happened. I'm in and out of CorelDraw as well. (I don't open Corel files in Illustrator.) I also see no disk errors in the event log, but, as I said, I'll check for updates because that couldn't hurt, right? :-)
Thanks again.

Illustrator CS3: perfectly fine pdf gets destroyed when placing in Illustrator

Hi!
I am new to Illustrator, but I just dont get the problem. A perfectly looking pdf comes out looking all wrong when it is placed in Illustrator.
This is how the diagram looks in pdf. Perfectly scalable.
This is how it looks after beeing imported in Illustrator.
Everything else that was imported form the pdf looks fine. Only this diagramm gets destroyed!
Why does this happen?

How was the PDF created? Printed, Exported? Some other method?
If nothing else helps, you could do the following: it looks like the problems are only in drop shadows and text. You could delete both from the Power Point file, export, save or print the PDF. Then import into Illustrator and recreate shadows and text there.
I don't think you could transfer the complete graohic from PP to Illy as vector anyway. So rather get away with as much as you can and then complete it.

InDesign vs. Illustrator

My company has Illustrator but I got a request for InDesign. From the product comparision, it seems like Illustrator does everything InDesign does. Can Illustrator be used in lieu for InDesign?

I have done multi-page documents in AI, but it isn't something I would like to do on a consistent basis. But it all really depends on what you are producing.
Likewise, I've done some fairly complicated illustrations using only InDesign's native illustration tools - but I'd rather eat glass professionally than do so on a regular basis.
It would be used to make minor edits on existing Pharmaceutical Packaging Artwork that is a combination of Artwork and Text ...stuff that needs corrections, not starting from scratch. Sounds like it would work...what do you think?
Sounds to me like it's already an InDesign document, right? In which case you can't edit it in Illustrator, only in InDesign.
If I as a client asked for work to be delivered in ID and got it back in Illustrator, I'd fire the supplier. In fact, I've done so. (Well, it's not really "firing" when you say "This contractor never gets work from us ever again, as this contractor cannot read the job spec.")

Placing a png logo created in Fireworks cs5 into Illustrator cs5

I am trying toplace a logo into illustrator. When I do it looks fine but any kind of scakeing makes it look all pixelated. I am trying to scale it down to fit onto a business card. When I do it looks just alright while the second logo (mostly test) looks great and completly scaleable. Is the somehting i'm doing wrong. I have tried copy and paste, p[lacing and opening into illustrator. I have tried wih all file formats and theyall do the same. My friend is asking for a ESP file which I can give but I want to make sure it is going to come out right before taking it to her printers. PLease help! Mahalo

I use FW for web design. But if my clients want a logo they can also put onto business card I should just create the logo in AI alltogether?
One of the longstanding "unwritten laws" of designing identity graphics (and illustration in general): Design for print first (and AI is not the only program for this); then re-purpose for web. Doing it the other way around inevitably leads to the kinds of problems you are having, and many more.
Beginners often get away with this at first with an unsuspecting client, but eventually the client finds out what he's got himself into when he encouters the need to deploy his identity graphics with the versatility that should have been built into them in the first place.
Similarly, it is far, far better to create identitiy graphics as efficiently-drawn vector graphics. You can always rasterize a vector graphic to any size needed. Creating raster images just because you are accustomed to raster "painting" and then assuming you can later automatically "convert" it to scaleable vector graphics with an autotrace feature is pure folly. Far too many beginners are deluded by this myth.
...my clients want a logo they can also put onto business card... [emphasis mine]
A true logo is the permanent, primary cornerstone of a business's or a product's identity. Design considerations aside, and speaking only to technical repro necessity:
Logos are designed and their master files built so as to technically accommodate all eventual uses that can be anticipated. Business cards and letterhead is just the no-brainer start. The client is soon going to need a storefront sign. He'll also need to advertise. Will your "logo" work when it has to be included in a full-color magazine ad? A single-color newspaper ad? Screen printed as a spot-color T-shirt imprint? Etched onto a giveaway pen? Embroidered onto a polo shirt? Embossed into a metal plate?
Fireworks is a fine program--for its purpose. Because of its targeted purpose, it is chock-full of features and effects that can be applied to vector paths, but which would nonetheless have to be rasterized for print. Many of those effects don't even correspond to a counterpart in PostScript programs. So you end up having to resort to rasterization and get yourself (or someone else who has to try to incorporate your graphics) into all kinds of trouble. And as we've already seen, logo design is about alot more than just print.
The same thing is true of Illustrator. Everything you draw in Illustrator can be rendered by a PostScript imagesetter. But that certainly doesn't mean that everything you draw in Illustrator is advisable for use in a proper logo.
A good logo designer always has in mind what downstream compromises he is making when he decides to include each and every element of the design--even treatments as "simple," for example, as an ordinary grad fill. Can a grad fill be rendered by cutting the logo out of plastic so as to comply with the signage specifications of a shopping mall? Such questions lead the designer to ask himself other questions: Is this design so weak that I have resorted to a stupid grad fill in an attempt to give it "uniqueness"? If so, it's time to start over.
So it's not a simple matter of which program to use. It's more a matter of which features to use. And that can be as problematic in Illustrator as in Fireworks. Moreover, though, it's about what quality logo design really is. It's alot more than just making something "look neat" on a monitor.
JET

Should I spend many hours in Illustrator puting objects on many separate layers before importing?

Very complex overlapping of objects in this project. My adobe Illustrator art has many hundreds of objects on only about 5 layers. When I imported into Flash I can only get to individual objects by breaking apart the layers. The art is very complicated, interlacing of two human figures I didn't design but I copied from ancient 500BC Greek pottery art for an historical film I'm making.
I labeled every object in Illustrator but apparently loose that while importing into Flash. Should I spend hours more in Illustrator putting everything on separate layers that needs to be used in separate layers for overlapping before importing to Flash? Objects in Illustrator automatically appear on a separate line but I guess that is not the same as a separate layer when you import into Flash, right? I am concerned as to how I will be able to make some of these limbs or clothing with all the objects associated with them be moved into just one layer for the overlapping of these things is very complex and I am certain it will take forever to figure out how to rearrange for proper overlapping order if I make a lot more layers, if it is even possible without a work around in some cases. Frankly I am having difficulty with the concepts of objects in Flash vs how layers work in software like Photoshop. MAC OSX FLASH CS6.

Look closely at your import settings when you import your AI file. Unless you flatten the illustrator layers into bitmaps, none of the objects will be lost. If you double-click what seems to be one object in Flash, you will find that all the component parts are still in there.
However, keeping things organized with layers is good practice in Illustrator, whether or not you're using the product in Flash, so it might be a good practice to cultivate longer term.

Illustrator CS3: Very Slow Open, Very Slow Save

Hello all,
I just recently have been issues with Illustrator CS3. Up until about a few weeks ago, it had been running flawlessly. Now, whenever I try to open up any EPS or AI, Illustrator will literally take at least a minute to open it. This happens with a complex 2mb AI files, but also for a tiny simple files consisting of a 1" square on a blank artboard. No matter the file size, it will take around a minute to open it up.
Opening a 44kb .eps: 75 seconds
Opening a 210kb .ai file: 67 seconds
Saving a 76kb .eps: 56 seconds
Export to grayscale PNG: 66 seconds
Export AI Layers to SWF Files: 2 seconds
This is ridiculous.
Saving is the same issue. It takes a ridiculously long time to save even a blank document.
It's not my machine (2x2.66ghz Intel Mac with 5gb ram, OSX 10.5.6). Photoshop feels a little sluggish too, but not to this extent. InDesign, Flash, Dreamweaver, Acrobat all run perfectly. I even uninstalled all the CS3 products and reinstalled to find the same issues. And now that I've been given a time sensitive job, I need to get this program running quickly again.
I'm not sure what I can do to solve the problem, aside from trying to reinstall OSX and start fresh. Any and all help is appreciated! Thank you!

Well, I reinstalled Mac OS X before even trying those methods. It was less of a hassle than I thought it would be. Solved the problems with Illustrator. Everything is running fantastic.
But, I was just working in Photoshop, opening about ~20-30 small PNG's at a time to resize, grayscale, etc. I opened up about 60 at once to make things go quicker. They all opened up, with a little bit of lag. Now, if I even try to open up 10-15 PNG's at a time, they load very slow, like the problem I was having before with Illustrator...
Is there anyway to reset some memory settings? Or clear some cache? I believe this is what caused my issues with Illustrator before (opening too many files at once.)

Placed .tiff files in illustrator have box around them.

I am wondering how to properly place .tiff files in illustrator, so that they can easily be set up for commercial printing. I have created a simple sell sheet for a product that has 3 placed tiff images in it. The images are circular and appear fine on screen. However, when printed, the images have a slightly darker box around them. The images were created in photoshop, and i'm wondering if i needed to use a clipping mask or perhaps another format for the images to maintain the transparency. Should i rasterize the images, embed, or keep linked? Any help would be great!

I am getting a dark line around psd images (they have clipping paths) which I place into illustrator. Everything looks fine in illustrator, but when I save the AI file with pdf compatibility and open it in photoshop, there is a dark line around the images. My solution was to save the bubble as a tiff file (there is an option to save with transparency), and then place the new file into AI. It seems to work soo-far. After I placed the attachments into this forum, I realized that they are too small to see the black lines around the bubbles.)
See post number 25 for more recent findings...

Illustrator applescript open multi-page PDF error

Hi all, I am trying to create a script to find and replace objects in a multi-page pdf in Illustrator. Everything else works except for open and save, which I still have to do manually. I tried to open the file using the following
open myFile as PDF with options {class:PDF open options, page:4}
But Applescript returns the error "Expected class name but found application constant or consideration."

Checkout this discussion
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/499840?tstart=0
esp the last from Mario Arizmendi

Pixel Units In Illustrator

Hi everyone,
I do a lot of web stuff with Illustrator, so I'm always using pixels. However, one of the more annoying things about this program is that things sometimes go out of line because of inbetween pixel values.
For example, I might draw a square and it could have a width of 123.34px ...".34"??!!!
Is there any way to get rid of the way Illustrator goes halfway between pixels. I am hoping for the kind of behaviour that snaps to pixels instead of having ridiculous values like that.
I always find I end up messing with widths and heights a lot in order to solve this.
Interestingly enough, when I come to export as a JPG...it almost seems like Illustrator moves everything to the nearest pixel...and again, sometimes this messes up some details layouts.
Aaarrgghgh!
Any help is great thanks,
Mikey.

new document, set your units to pixels.
go to preferences->guides and grid
set your gridline and subdivisions to 1
view menu->snap to grid
and if you want, show grid
I seem to remember some bug where the grid spacing couldn't be changed on an existing document, so you might have to only do this on a brand fresh document, (and copy/past your stuff in there) It seems to only work if I open a document, change the settings, close the document, and start a new one...

Illustrator crashes when I drag text elements

I am running the most recent version of the Creative Cloud and Illustrator. I am using a brand-new Macbook Air running OS X 10.10.1, Intel Core i7 Processor, 8GB of RAM.
So whenever I open Illustrator now everything functions normally, until I drag a text element. I can type the text element, and as long as I have placed it perfectly on my first attempt nothing goes wrong. However, after clicking and dragging the text does not move, then the program crashes seconds later. I'm not sure what could be causing this but it is very frustrating, any and all help is much appreciated. Thanks,
Ryan

Ryan,
The issue may be caused by the Chrome Pushbullet extension, see this post #3 by Matt with the solution,
https://forums.adobe.com/message/6984777#6984777
or by the Adobe Color extension, see this post #2 byhexxstatic with the solution,
https://forums.adobe.com/message/7095368#7095368

InDesign CS 5 vs Illustrator CS 5 large format output help needed

Ok here's the deal, I work in a small agency in Dubai, we have many nationalities and over here so, so many people use Illustrator for everything, and it drives me up the wall.
Anyway we had 40 2x3 metre boards to be designed and the lcient asked for them to be delivered as Illustrator EPS files. So each one would have to be done seperately with high res images in and this took days. Whereas in InDEsign it would take a quarter of that time.
They sare saying if I supply high res PDFs from InDesign the quality isn't as good. Something to do with rasterization?
Does anyoen know if this is true as I need some hard facts abotu this before I can tackle my boss and the client next time and eventually get everyone using InDesign instead of Illustrator, which is pretty stupid.
One more thing, one of the guys here did a 3 metre high board in Photoshop and it came out fine (if not a massive file) and he says he knows for a fact if it was done in InDesign it wouldn't output as well.
Any thoughts or help would be greatly received,
Thanks!
Dave

ComputerGeekette,
I don't doubt for one second that this is indeed your experience and that you have settled into what I can best describe as a very degenerate workflow in order to get your job done under the conditions you describe.
Having said that, I must say that your experience and the fact that you believe that this is the best workflow you can achieve given the conditions is an exceptionally sad commentary on the state of the graphic arts industry in general and the printing industry in particular. The workflow you describe is a “lowest common denominator” workflow that almost guarantees that in most cases in which you have anything other than pure raster imagery to print, you will get results that are not optimal.
You should be able to use PDF/X-4 files as the means of passing artwork from your clients to you and then subsequently from you to your printers. Source files (i.e., native Illustrator, InDesign, and Photoshop files as well as assets such as imagery and fonts) should not be the currency of the realm here.
When I need to go “outside” to print (for anything my fleet of laser printers and wide format printers can't handle including offset printing jobs), I typically go and interview the print service provider and provide a sample job to print using a PDF/X-4 job with live transparency and color managment. If they cannot handle it in their normal workflow or cannot adjust to the twenty first century very rapidly, I move on to another print service provider. For better or worse, there are plenty of very hungry printers out there and at least some of them realize that unless they learn to deal with modern workflows, they will be history like the many thousands of other such printers that have gone belly-up over the last half dozen years!
- Dov

Flash is introducing insane rounding errors because of some arbitrary decision to round x and y coordinates to 0.05 increments

The data type for x and y properties is a double precision floating-point Number, so why is it rounding off values? Rounding is an unnecessary operation, and furthermore it's not saving any memory, because it just requires me to store a more precise value elsewhere, in addition to the lower-bit rounded value.
This rounding causing unnecessary additional work when coding against these values, because I have to round other values as well to make sure there aren't discrepancies when transforming coordinates.
So I was really surprised to discover that if I assign a value to a DisplayObject's x or y coordinates such as 10.3333333, and trace the value, it becomes 10.3.
If I assign 10.666666, it becomes 10.65. Apparently it's rounding everything to the nearest 20th of a unit. So now, I have to override the x and y properties to store the Number-type value, once again as a Number-type, which is not rounded.
Flash's arbitrary rounding of coordinates is causing erratic rounding errors when performing coordinate system transformations using localToGlobal and globalToLocal to find the composite scale of an object on the stage.
For example, suppose an object was laid out to occupy one third of the display, and it's width ends up being 200.3333333. One calculation of my docking framework involves obtaining the orthagonal bounding box of the child by transforming its corner points into stage coordinates using localToGlobal, which accounts for things like scaling and rotation. So despite everything having a scale of 1, and having zero rotation, you'd still end up with a rectangle with a width of 200.3 instead of the expected 200.3333333 in stage coordinates. So it would appear as though the composite scale is slightly smaller than 1, since 200.3 / 200.333333 is 0.99983361081528. But the composite scale is in fact 1, we just don't know that because Flash unexpectedly rounded some coordinates to an arbitrary 1/20 unit.
No game engine in existence does that with its transformation matrices, because it's retarded to round so early, and then allow those rounding errors to accumulate through a display hierarchy via functions like localToGlobal.
This rounding is causing jittering by a pixel or so when animating a drop down panel in my my docking framework, because it's constantly correcting for unexpected anomalies in the scaling factor on each frame. Despite the parent container having a constant fixed width, the child object, once its corner coordinates are passed through localToGlobal, end up reporting rounded widths, which ultimately leads to a series such as the following:
dockedChild.width: 538.3842482614723, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3754595467979, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3666709755926, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3578825478539, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3490942635798, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3903098666023, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3815210529766, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3727323828218, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3639438561353, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3551554729148, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.346367233158, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3875826274011, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3787938582956, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.37000523266, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3612167504922, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3524284117897, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3436402165502, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.384855402015, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3760666774294, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3672780963132, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3584896586638, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.349701364479, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
dockedChild.width: 538.3909170139807, parent.width: 558.3412118444024
Is there any way to turn off this rounding to 0.05 units?
To override the x and y values to have greater precision, I must do the following:
public class Control extends MovieClip
    public function Control()
        super(); //Flash performs timeline/graphics initialization here, which means after this call, the object may have non-zero x and y values
        _x = super.x; //acquire them immediately, so if we try to set x or y to zero, the 'if (_x != value)' check does not think it's already positioned at zero and ignore the call
        _y = super.y;
    private var _x:Number;
    private var _y:Number;
    override public function get x():Number { return _x; } //return precise value, rather than rounded super.x value
    override public function set x( value:Number ):void
        if (_x != value) //ensure value is actually changing before performing work
            _x = value; //store precise value in private variable
            super.x = value; //DisplayObject will round value to nearest 0.05
            if (stage != null)
                stage.invalidate(); //ensure RENDER event is dispatched to re-render anything that may need to account for a repositioned object
    override public function get y():Number { return _y; } //return precise value, rather than rounded super.y value
    override public function set y( value:Number ):void
            if (_y != value) //ensure value is actually changing before performing work
            _y = value; //store precise value in private variable
            super.y = value; //DisplayObject will round value to nearest 0.05
            if (stage != null)
                    stage.invalidate(); //ensure RENDER event is dispatched to re-render anything that may need to account for a repositioned object    }
Most importantly, you must initialize the _x and _y values to super.x and super.y in the constructor immediately after a call to super(), in order to acquire any non-zero values that the object instance may have been initialized with on the timeline.
I just cannot fathom why they didn't leave the x and y coordinates as-is, instead of rounding them, when it causes so many problems and complications, and requires overriding not only x and y, but functions like localToGlobal/globalToLocal/getRect.
This has been an issue for a while:
flash - AS3 x and y property precision - Stack Overflow specifically: flash - AS3 x and y property precision - Stack Overflow
http://www.actionscript.org/forums/showthread.php3?t=96510
Problems with Sub-pixel Coordinate Movement
In fact, that last link says: "
Running the code:
The motion is still jerky; and
The distance between the two squares diverges
However, the one benefit is that the distance does not diverge by more than 1 pixel."
That's precisely what I saw happening in my own code, as you can see from the series of widths I posted above, which seem to fluctuate randomly between 358.34 and 358.39.

Actually, there is a way.
If you simply activate the 3D transformation by setting z to zero, the matrix3D replaces the matrix and concatatedMatrix properties of the DisplayObject's transform object, and suddenly x and y values maintain a precision higher than a twip. It's not quite the double-precision value of the Number type, however, and looks more like a single-precision 32-bit floating point value.
For example, if you run the following code:
var mc:Sprite = new Sprite();
mc.x = 200.0 + (1/3); //assign high precision value to x
trace(mc.x); //traces 200.3 (rounded)
mc.z = 0; //activate 3D matrix
mc.x = 200.0 + (1/3);
trace(mc.x); //traces 200.33333740234374 (still rounded, but accurate to 5 decimal places)
Based on the traced output, it's clear that it is possible to force the DisplayObject to get and set higher precision values for x and y properties, without any modifications to the underlying classes. However, I'm not happy with that solution for 2 reasons. First, it activates stage 3D and introduces graphical glitches and unnecessary bitmap caching. Second, it's still not "Number" precision; it's something less than that.
Instead, I was able to successfully work around the issue by altering the overrides for properties x, y, scaleX, scaleY, and methods localToGlobal, globalToLocal, and getRect to use privately maintained values. I was already using privately maintained width and height values in order to decouple the size from the scaling factors. No need to override getBounds, since it accounts for stroke widths and will be non-exact anyway.
The consistent, high precision values are vital, and they increased the performance of my layout framework, because it's actually able to prevent unnecessary assignments to x, y, width, and height when the values aren't actually changing. #beginrant: Such detection is impossible when Flash internally rounds everything, because if you try to keep something at, for example, 1/3 of the screen, it will always think you're trying to assign a high precision value of 200.33333 over a less precise value of 200.3 as I had previously described. Alternatively, you'd have to pre-round any value you try to assign, which is more work than it's worth. It's sort of terrible that Flash rounds property values as it does, because the value you assign can never be read back the same. That's generally not how numerical properties should work when assigning values of the same data type and precision. #endrant
In particular, two optimizations were made in the getRect override. If the target coordinate system is null or "this", then it simply returns new Rectangle( 0, 0, _width, _height ), and more importantly, if the target coordinate system is "parent" (which is the case 99% of the time) and rotation is zero and scale is 1 (also the case 99% of the time for GUI elements), then it simply returns new Rectangle( _x, _y, _width, _height ), which is the internal, high-precision values for x, y, width, and height (resemblance to AS2 properties is purely coincidental; this is AS3 code). That allows me to skip the following code path 99% of the time, which would otherwise return the orthagonal bounding box of the element at any rotation in any coordinate system:
//These instance variables are used to accelerate calculations, see comments.
//Upper left is always an empty point, and these variables store upper right, lower right, and lower left corner points.
protected var p_UR:Point; //DO NOT ALTER p_UR.y; LEAVE AT ZERO ALWAYS
protected var p_LR:Point; //Lower right corner: x = width, y = height
protected var p_LL:Point; //DO NOT ALTER p_LL.x; LEAVE AT ZERO ALWAYS
//Returns the orthogonal bounding rectangle of the object in the specified target coordinate system
//based on its own internal height and width (actual contentRect may be larger).
//getContentRect function was added to replace the original functionality of this method
override public function getRect( targetCoordinateSpace:DisplayObject ):Rectangle
    switch (_scaleMode) //GUIControl allows decoupling of size and scale
        case SCALE_NOSYNC_SIZE:
            if (targetCoordinateSpace == null || targetCoordinateSpace == this)
                return new Rectangle( 0, 0, _width, _height );
            //UPDATE: Created this optimization to ensure rounding errors introduced by
            //Flash's tendency to round x and y coordinates to twips are not introduced
            //by localToGlobal/globalToLocal calls, so they are avoided if possible.
            if (targetCoordinateSpace == parent && rotation == 0 && scaleX == 1 && scaleY == 1)
                return new Rectangle( _x, _y, _width, _height );
            p_UR.x = _width; //note the p_UR.y is always zero
            p_LR.x = _width;
            p_LR.y = _height;
            p_LL.y = _height; //note the p_LL.x is always zero
            break;
        case SCALE_SYNC_SIZE:
            var contentRect:Rectangle = getContentRect( true ); //must use unscaled points when performing local/global transforms, since this object is scaled
            p_UR.x = contentRect.right; //note the p_UR.y is always zero
            p_LR.x = contentRect.right;
            p_LR.y = contentRect.bottom;
            p_LL.y = contentRect.bottom; //note the p_LL.x is always zero
            break;
    return calcOrthogonalBoundingBox(
        targetCoordinateSpace.globalToLocal( localToGlobal( EMPTY_POINT ) ),
        targetCoordinateSpace.globalToLocal( localToGlobal( p_UR ) ),
        targetCoordinateSpace.globalToLocal( localToGlobal( p_LR ) ),
        targetCoordinateSpace.globalToLocal( localToGlobal( p_LL ) )
protected function calcOrthogonalBoundingBox( p0:Point, p1:Point, p2:Point, p3:Point ):Rectangle
    //Assuming no rotation, points 0 and 3 are most likely to be min_x. This optimization minimizes the likely number of assignments.
    //Similar optimizations are in place for max_x, min_y, and max_y, all patterns are ordered 0,1,2,3... starting with the two most likely candidates in the sequence.
    var min_x:Number = p3.x;
    if (p0.x < min_x) min_x = p0.x;
    if (p1.x < min_x) min_x = p1.x;
    if (p2.x < min_x) min_x = p2.x;
    var max_x:Number = p1.x;
    if (p2.x > max_x) max_x = p2.x;
    if (p3.x > max_x) max_x = p3.x;
    if (p0.x > max_x) max_x = p0.x;
    var min_y:Number = p0.y;
    if (p1.y < min_y) min_y = p1.y;
    if (p2.y < min_y) min_y = p2.y;
    if (p3.y < min_y) min_y = p3.y;
    var max_y:Number = p2.y;
    if (p3.y > max_y) max_y = p3.y;
    if (p0.y > max_y) max_y = p0.y;
    if (p1.y > max_y) max_y = p1.y;
    return new Rectangle( min_x, min_y, max_x - min_x, max_y - min_y );
In this framework, particularly in SCALE_NOSYNC_SIZE mode (the default), the width and height are assigned and internally maintained, independently of the scaleX and scaleY values. The internally maintained values are used for performing layout and drawing operations such as backgrounds and borders. In the extremely rare occasion where the actual content needs to be measured, I just use getBounds, such as in the constructor when initializing the "original" size of the clip's content, if it has timeline content, or possibly bitmap methods for masked objects.
These changes have all increased the performance of my framework by an order of magnitude and have virtually eliminated 3rd layout passes, so I'm happy with it. I still wish the Flash runtime would be updated to simply stop rounding these values.

Illustrator rounds everything up

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for