But you always have to ask the question "is the engine entirely responsible for this feature?".
Your point is very well seen by me. And the answer is NO!
So if the engine developer thinks "ok lets do something!" he will end up in a very limited set of functionality that *has* to be extended of course to match your needs
Well my though is just to have some limited functions, and of course expanding is the very heart of the versatile idea.
In most cases, we want panels to keep there relative size in location through-out resolution changes. However there is no need to force that choice, and so I offered flags to disable the behavior if you so choose...
few simple flags to control this, such as NO_SCALE NO_ALIGN NO_LOD.
The use of LOD images is I guess a personal choice. When a image designed for fitting in 800X600 scale to 1920x1080, switching to a higher resolution source image looks better. But again that's a personal preference , but also a simple flag could give freedom to not use the functionality.
We currently can grab the current screen res and the engine will not tick-out-of-bounds, it will not (unlike the old days) set to a res to large and then present a problem. So there truly is nothing about the stepping I use the get the "next best windowed size" that should be a part of the engine... I Agree!
I have a solution for this as a #include. My question is misspoken( miswritten?), I think the question is better stated "Should the engine include a Library for these issues with panels?" The only real thing that make me want more engine support is the idea of moving my handling from the skill_x to a simple flag. Sure I am solving a problem I don't have, I work with a lot of people who do have this issue and don't have my solution.
Ok
Mal
