-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.4k
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
curveVertex() with endshape(CLOSE) does not close with a curve #3352
Comments
My expectation would be to close the shape with a curved vertex similar to all the others. |
I don't think this issue can be closed yet. While the issue of shapes constructed with curved vertexes is not being closed when using |
I think this bug doesn't only exist in P5.js but also in the normal Processing. For me it happened when trying to create a circle shaped audio visualizer and the first and last point were connected with a straight line instead of a curve. Processing Version: 3.5.3 |
I have the same problem and the closing of the curved vertices close with a straight line. This is not optimal I think. Is there maybe any progress already made on a solution for this or can you give a pointer to how this could be implemented? |
I'm experience the same problem as @alsino In this sketch where I'm using CurvedVertex, the expected outcome (if the shape is closed) is that all spikes would have the same shape. https://editor.p5js.org/yanngraf/sketches/Zbp6C8XBp It is not the case, the start/end point is spiky. |
@yanngraf as a workaround you can repeat the starting vertices to achieve the expected behavior: https://editor.p5js.org/brianelete/sketches/-ujBjhRU3 |
This is now resolved in 2.0 after #7373! |
Nature of issue?
Most appropriate sub-area of p5.js?
Which platform were you using when you encountered this?
Details about the bug:
When utilizing curveVertex() with endshape(CLOSE), the behavior is to draw a straight line to the close the shape. My expected behavior would be to have a curve complete the shape. Does anyone else feel this way? is this something that should be addressed? This has also been mentioned in #408
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: