>I believe the PG frame is exactly correct. On a Plus, the outside of the
>frame exactly touches the bottom of the menu bar and the bottom of the
>window. If you fit your window to the inside of the frame, then you are
>using a small precalculated border to keep things even all the way around.
>But if you run PG on a Plus, (or set your monitor to 640x480 and run a
>frame for a 13" screen) you'll see that it is exact -- right down to the
>last pixel.
>
>Best,
>
>-STAZ  ~)~

Staz:

Sorry, two things: 1) I was in the process of composing that email when I
was interrupted. When I returned, I accidentally sent the email. The email
wasn't supposed to be sent until I checked everything out -- and I would
have soften the email a bit, bug is not the word I should have used; 2) My
concern is in making a window a size that exactly matches the size of the
monitor frame and then finding that the window does not actually cover the
screen of the monitor.

For example, I just made a window in PG Pro that covers the entire monitor
frame for a Classic monitor. The window measures 498 by 292 (via window
specs). When I run the program on a Classic monitor, I find that there is
about a six (or so) pixel border around the window. Therefore, the window
doesn't appear to be as large as what was shown by the PG Pro monitor frame.

It could be that some of my confusion is in the type of window I'm using. I
realize that some windows have title/scroll bars and some don't and that
affects the "footprint" of the window (i.e., some windows being the same
size have different footprints). However, if I make a window (regardless of
type) in PG Pro that covers the entire monitor frame, then shouldn't it
also cover the entire monitor when run of that monitor?

tedd

___________________________________________________________________
<mailto:tedd@...>	               http://sperling.com/