By enabling on-zoom resampling of arrows, speed, altitude and conveyor data it is possible to more effectively
tailor the visuals of these renderers. For example, the altitude and speed are point-reduced based on zoom, and now
look much cleaner at low zoom values. Likewise, the arrows are now rendered at consistent size regardless of
zoom. Also, the conveyor segments are similar length onscreen regardless of zoom. During a zoom change, the
prevoiusly resampled track is killed, so there is a brief flash while the appropriate track is resampled. This
appeared visually better than drawing the old track with incorrect spacing/scaling.
A bit of inspiration; rather than trigger the culling for tracks when they are loaded and every time you zoom
(i.e, creating the resampled or simplified tracks such as standard track (Ramer Douglas Peucer line reduction), arrows,
speed, markers (all resample)... now the system uses the bounding rectangle of the original track to trigger the cull(s)
only when the track is onscreen and viewable. This now allows dozens of tracks to be loaded without initial slowdown
caused by all those resamplers and cullers running in the background. It's an on-demand system, in other words.
So, whereas previously if you had 20 GPX tracks loaded, and you zoomed in/out, then all 20 of those tracks would start
a Ramer-Douglas-Peucer resize, which would significantly slow down the whole thing (even though they are asynchronous
they do take a toll on performance). Now, when you zoom in/out, only visible tracks (or ones which become visible)
will start the RDP resize.
I've done quite a bit of refactoring on the asynchronous resamplers to optimise the code. I've also checked carefully
the boundary cases of 0 and 1 point lists and ensured that they operate OK. Fixed up the speed resampler, which was
placing results in the wrong list :)
I got to thinking that the paint variable state should be preserved after the drawing functions did their stuff. Saving
and restoring individual values inside each function was getting messy, so I implemented a local paint variable which
was updated with the important stuff from the passed-in paints. The local variable is now used for all painting/drawing
and the original paint guaranteed unchanged. I could see issues elsewhere if I changed something and other code
was assuming it was already set. So, quite a bit of fiddling with the code to get this working, but now it's clean.
I also did a bit of work on the arrows - see video at https://youtu.be/wvE9HUDMqSM
Basically they're much nicer, but also they are coloured. It's just an experimental thing, where the colour is based
upon the distance along the track; using the same rainbow scaling as the altitude display does; that is... purple up
to red.
The 'bounds' that I had implemeted earlier described the minimal rectangle inside which a whole track was contained. This
bounding rectangle was used to quickly cull all track types at draw-time. And it worked well... too well! The current track
is continually adding points to itself, so its bounds need to be recalculated regularly, not just at startup like other
track types.
So, I've implemented a new Renderable, 'CurrentTrack' which does the special handling for that type of track. It is
smart in that it only recalculates/updates bounding rectangle on the newly added points, so it's very quick. I tested
it on my phone and it appears to be working OK.
Other minor adjustments here and there as I tweak things.
Fixed a bug related to the distance used for line reduction. The previous value of zoom was being used, instead
of the new value. This kind of explains why I could see line reduction changes more than I though I should have
been able to. Now it's looking very nice. I don't think there will be many more changes. If any.
I've been through and cleaned up the code - minor improvements and cleanups. I'm happy with it and will I stop making
changes and wait for review. I also now understand how git branches work :) so I will work on my own branch.
I hope that this addition makes it into OsmAnd; I'm confident that it is robust and well written.
There will probably be a bug or two, but relatively minor I am sure.
I've been through and cleaned up the code - minor improvements and cleanups.
It's done. Now that I'm happy with it I propose to stop making changes and wait for review.
I also now understand how git branches work, so I will work on my own branch.
I hope that this addition makes it into OsmAnd; I'm confident that it is robust and well written.
