Hello together,
I want to say thanks to Luke for fixing the markerclusterer so fast.
It helps me.
I've written my own solution by catching the 'clusterclick' handler
from outside which also works but its better to use your new version.
Thank you very much.
@Larry
I know what you mean and I know the given markerclusterer speed test
example is for what it stands for: to test the performance of the
implementation.
It was not my intention to point out problems of this implementation.
I wanted to give JUST AN EXAMPLE not more. I could use any other
markerclusterer example for that.
However, the issue is solved now and it works fine.
Thank you all.
Raik
On 2 Dez., 01:08, Luke Mahé <
lu...@google.com> wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> This is probably how the MarkerClusterer should have always worked :)
> Instead of fitting to the bounds of the cluster it was fitting to the extend
> bounds of the cluster.
>
> I've fixed this and you and grab the latest version from the trunk.
>
> Also on a side note, a few weeks back I made a change so that markers are
> added to the closest cluster instead of the first cluster that they land in,
> so if you haven't upgraded to the latest version you should :)
>
> -- Luke
>
> On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 3:16 AM,
geocode...@gmail.com
> >
google-maps-js-a...@googlegroups.com<
google-maps-js-api-v3%2Bunsu...@googlegroups.com>
> > .