Daniel Brockman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Jensen) writes: > >> a) we should leave the marks after commands (customizable), > > Why? I think in the most common use case, you will mark > some tracks, run some command on them, and then no longer > care about the marking. That suggests that the default > behavior should be to have commands "use up" the marking.
Ah well, that was my original plan. I must be tired, because I thought you wanted the marks there like they are now. Let's change that one to "we should remove the marks after commands" then. >> c) Unmarking all saves the marks, or we can have a separate command. >> d) We use the `* *' command because it's handy. > > Having an unmark all command separate from `* *' would > be redundant, I think. Other commands would unmark everything, that was what I meant. I agree it's a little redundant (but sometimes it's good to have more than one way to do things.) >> I'm profiling the code, and I see bottlenecks in >> `bongo-line-internal-infoset' and `bongo-line-get-property'. >> The latter is called a lot of times all over the place. >> We could use a little optimization here. > > Interesting. I don't have a plan for this now, though. _______________________________________________ bongo-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bongo-devel
