On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Chris Shoemaker <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 01:35:30PM -0800, Charles Day wrote: > > Could someone enlighten me as to the state of the register rewrite, or > point > > me to some kind of "readme" about it? I would like to know what the > approach > > was, where things left off, etc. > > I had a quick look at the register-rewrite branch. My first impression is > > that the original register code has not been changed at all and that some > > kind of new stuff based on GtkTreeView was being worked on. Is it the > > intention to abandon a GUI-independent register design for a Gtk+ > dependent > > version? > > Yes, exactly. At the time, it was somewhat of a feasibility study, as > GtkTreeViews were still a little new and there weren't too many > examples of good implementations that used 1000s+ of entries. > These days, it's not really a question of the quality of the gtk+ bits. > OK, I may take a look at some point. I did get pretty familiar GtkTreeView and its related widgets when fixing the Security Editor and Price Editor. Now that the known register crashes have been fixed, at the moment I probably give higher priority to lots, OFX investment importing, and Mac packaging. > I haven't had the time to work on it (or any other part of GnuCash) > for quite a while now. IIRC, last time I worked on it, I got copy and > pasting of transactions working, which was pretty low on my priority > list, so I think it's probably usable, though not polished. > Cool, thanks for the update. I take it the old split register code is to be abandoned, so I don't have to worry about bring my trunk register fixes over to the register-rewrite branch. > > -chris > Cheers, Charles _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
