Quoting Neil Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Thursday 25 August 2005 9:21 pm, Derek Atkins wrote:
Do you really need to keep track of the operations individually?
Not particularly, it just seemed handy to use an enum initially - I was
thinking that a switch() statement was going to be needed later. I was
planning to differentiate a MODIFY from a CREATE but I think that was just a
hangover from tying the undo idea to events and dirty instances.
Okay. Well, this is why it's good to talk things over before we write
code. ;)
IMHO this is a simpler API :)
I would think a much better API would be:
QofOperation qof_book_start_operation(QofBook* book, const char
*op_name); void qof_book_end_operation(QofOperation oper);
Makes sense.
At least that's my take on it all.
What about the number of undo operations to hold relative to the number of
changes per operation?
It's not a problem for the CLI implementation, it's more for the future.
My personal feeling is that there should be an unlimited number of changes per
operation, but a limited number of operations that are remembered. Undo/Redo
is per operation, so you should limit that. But if you have an import
operation it would be BAD if the undo buffer couldn't remember the
whole import
in order to undo it!
-derek
--
Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB)
URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/ PP-ASEL-IA N1NWH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP key available
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
