On Jun 28, 8:50 am, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> My guess at present is that the best long-term solution will be to > eliminate both v.tempBodyString and at.out, but this plan carries > significant risk. I should emphasize that it would not be easy to use the at.out stack when reading the new sentinels. Indeed, writing to at.v.tempBodyList solved some really nasty problems when reading new sentinels. Thus, given a choice, I would much prefer to use at.v.tempBodyList in the *old* code rather than trying to use at.out in the *new* code. To repeat, recent experience shows that trying to retain at.out and at.tempBodyString (for old sentinels) while using at.v.tempBodyList (for new sentinels) is likely to lead to truly wretched code in some already-too-complex code. Thus, I think we have to choose one set of data structures over the other, and thus we must try to use at.v.tempBodyList for both the old and new code. EKR -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
