The human chose Option A: teach sylpheed-formats own renderer to draw
rotation_deg so it and the port stay comparable and verify-screen keeps meaning
someone is wrong.
Three pieces, because rotation alone does nothing on the title. blit gains a
rotated path that draws by inverse mapping over the rotated bounding box, turning
about the pivot, whose absolute position is invariant under scale; zero rotation
keeps the original forward-mapped path byte for byte so non-rotating screens
cannot regress. compose draws a nested .rat leaf when the leaf carries geometry
the parent does not, which is the sweeps case, but not as a blanket rule since a
button s leaf duplicates its parent. And --at poses leaves at a keyframe time,
because the sweeps hold off-screen at x=1521 so a resting composite omits them.
A trap found the hard way: posing EVERYTHING at one global time is wrong, because
a top-level group s final keyframes are its exit ramp and rest() deliberately
stops before them. Posing the title at t=358 walked every parent into its exit
and drove the disagreement from 10.92 to 61.74. So at poses leaves only.
Controls: 0 and 360 degrees byte-identical to the unrotated path, 90 degrees
swaps a 10x4 to 4x10, area conserved within 15 percent, centroid stays on the
pivot. 116 lib tests pass, main_menu unchanged at 9.26.
And the verification did not show what it was meant to, which is reported rather
than buried: scanning the pose time against the title capture gives 10.73 to
11.17 against a 10.92 baseline -- flat, no minimum, best 1.7 percent. The
whole-frame mean is dominated by the tone curve, and the renderer still does not
draw ptlogo1/ptlogo2 at all, which is a far larger spatial gap than two
translucent sweeps. So rotation is correct in isolation and no screen regressed,
but whether it closes the port s 1.81 percent is not established here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QsEPXWVaEpyfudtR6re1Pd
81f42f9041