Rect usability improvements

[RazrFalcon]

Rect usability improvements

[nical]

Note that you can write let r = rect(x, y, w, h); as a shorthand to create rects instead of Rect::new which is indeed cumbersome. I think that it is already nicer than Rect::from_xywh and implementing the From trait for a tuple of floats.

I'd be happy to add left, right, top, bottom, width and height. I am less enthused by x() and y() since left and top would provide the same thing in a less ambiguous ways (some libraries defines rects as a pair of points or a point at the center with width and height, etc. we even were close to change the representation in euclid at some point).
I don't think that setters are providing much (foo.set_width(w); vs foo.origin.width = w;). Although set_left/right/top/bottom would provide something useful.

[RazrFalcon]

you can write let r = rect(x, y, w, h);

How it works?

Should I make a pull request?

[nical]

See: https://docs.rs/euclid/0.17.2/euclid/fn.rect.html it's a simple function that just calls TypedRect::new(...). There are equivalent functions point2, point3, size2, vec2, etc.

[RazrFalcon]

Oh, this a global function. Didn't thought about it.

[kvark]

I'm not particularly happy about "Rect::from((0, 0, 10, 10)) // From trait" variant since it's not clear what the parameters are. Same applies to the existing rect function to an extent.

[ArtHome12]

Perhaps this issue should be closed as well as #321

• For the first two points of the table, the author's question has been fully resolved.
• Regarding x() and y(), foo.set_width(w); vs foo.size.width = w; I find your explanation satisfactory and no clarifications have followed from the author and others for 5 years :)
• The only unresolved issue is with synonyms left, right, top, bottom, width and height. My suggestion - guided by the principle of "less code is better" and given the long period of time that has passed, leave it as it is. Until new considerations.