Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Code optimizations for TextLiquidFill. #165

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2020

Conversation

awhitford
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Changed _loadValue to be from 0 to 1 instead of 0 to 100 to avoid a division by 100.
  • Removed unnecessary stop calls and null guards in dispose.
  • Simplified calculations in _WavePainter.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 6, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #165 (8cc3f82) into master (df9c63a) will decrease coverage by 0.08%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #165      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.01%   90.92%   -0.09%     
==========================================
  Files           9        9              
  Lines         445      441       -4     
==========================================
- Hits          405      401       -4     
  Misses         40       40              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
lib/src/text_liquid_fill.dart 88.31% <100.00%> (-0.58%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update df9c63a...8cc3f82. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Owner

@aagarwal1012 aagarwal1012 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code changes look good to me, but we should proceed towards updating readme and release v3.0.0.

@aagarwal1012 aagarwal1012 merged commit 341fba6 into aagarwal1012:master Dec 6, 2020
@awhitford awhitford deleted the tlf-opt branch December 6, 2020 18:16
@awhitford
Copy link
Collaborator Author

We should proceed towards updating readme and release v3.0.0.

Oh good -- I was unclear if you were sold on the 3.0 idea.

@aagarwal1012
Copy link
Owner

@awhitford, I really liked your suggested changes and I totally support the fact of releasing v3.0.0.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants