Code: Select all
[Variables] [Rainmeter] Update=1000 DynamicWindowSize=1 AccurateText=1 BackgroundMode=2 SolidColor=247,47,47,255 SolidColor2=47,47,247,255 GradientAngle=90 SkinWidth=200 SkinHeight=150 ---Measures--- ---Meters--- [MeterTestString] Meter=STRING X=0 Y=0 FontFace=Consolas FontColor=255,255,255,255 SolidColor=247,47,47,255 SolidColor2=47,47,247,255 GradientAngle=90 Padding=4,3,4,3 FontSize=14 AntiAlias=1 Text="Same ? #CRLF#Gradients" DynamicVariables=1 [MeterTestShape] Meter=Shape X=0R Y=0r Shape=Rectangle 0,0,100,50 | Fill LinearGradient SameFillGradient | StrokeWidth 0 SameFillGradient=90 | 247,47,47,255 ; 0.0 | 47,47,247,255 ; 1.0 AntiAlias=1 DynamicVariables=1
While not a bug or anything like that, is there any particular reason for the gradient on the Shape meter (top right corner) having the opposite direction compared to the gradient on both the skin and the String meter (top left corner) - despite all of them having the same gradient parameters? Is this intentional or it's just an unintentional, minor slip up at the time of the Shape meter's development?
Why I ask:
Because, despite using the same parameters, there will be inconsistencies between skins that draw their background (or meters) using the skin and String meter "style", compared to the ones that use a Shape to draw their background. Of course, a formula quickly solves this, but I had to ask.