On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Jody Bruchon <[email protected]> wrote: > On 3/18/2014 10:51 AM, Jody Bruchon wrote: >> >> Out of an interest in seeing this feature, I'm looking at vi.c > > > I've started implementing the "undo" function; it looks to be easier than I > expected now that I have a feel for the way the buffer is handled and should > add very little actual code (though obviously it will increase dynamic > memory usage due to storing undo data somewhere.) If I manage to produce a > working undo command, I'll send in a patch for Should I make the number of > undo levels a tunable option via Kconfig? Perhaps via an unlimited option > (just keep allocating undo data until OOM) and a limited one that allows a > maximum number of undo levels to be set?
In my opinion, a starting point of X hard coded undo levels is fine and see how it goes. I personally think it is not worth giving too much customization right from the beginning. Thanks for picking this up and working on this! _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
