You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I believe that they should instead be exclusive, taking into account the penWidth(s). In my example, the fill and stroke are different layers/strokes; this logic should take into account the width of both of those layers.
If you agree that this is a bug, I can look into this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
In principle I agree that this is a bug. In practice, I'm slightly worried about the artefacts around shapes that have very "pointy" features (think of a very narrow, but very high, triangle). The additional overlap around the periphery minimizes the coverage holes, as in this illustration:
Ah, that's a good point. What do you think about adding a parameter for changing the inset amount? I just saw a request for this feature in the drawingbots discord, and I think it would be useful.
When using both fill and stroke, they overlap:
I believe that they should instead be exclusive, taking into account the penWidth(s). In my example, the fill and stroke are different layers/strokes; this logic should take into account the width of both of those layers.
If you agree that this is a bug, I can look into this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: