Patrick Lam wrote: > The Win32 code would not be smaller in any meaningful way; we could > save at most 2k from the binary size or > something like that.
So what do you consider a size reduction "in any meaningful way" since this apparently doesn't fit your bill? Do you expect a small and localized patch that all of a sudden removes 1MB from the AW binary? You have to start somewhere. > p.s. I'm not saying that fv_Cursor is a bad thing to do, IIRC it was you who advicated a Q'n'D hack with a thread, bool and a mutex for the view class. Btw, wasn't threads a big no-no, similar to the usage of C++ templates? > but I'm in favour of solving one problem at a time. And you think solving the cursor problem is solving many problems, and that's a problem??? > fv_Caret is a single thing which can be fixed by itself. And how exacly does the code (with my mentioned modifications/removals) I displayed not fix it? /Mike - please don't cc
