That is a very good idea Terry, even though it cost me quite a bit of time mainly due to my unfamiliarity with bzr. To make a long story short I eventually tracked down the issue to revision 4163. It does not manifest in revision 4162 so 4163 was the first revision that introduced the bug. Diff shows quite a bit of change in the qtGui.py w.r.t. cursors and other events. Commit message said:"Some heavy-duty hacking to event handlers to make mouse clicks work like alt-x or ctrl-g. Catching click events is much safer than catching focus events. All unit tests, but this must be considered experimental code. Fortunately, only a few methods were changed."
I will have to leave the heavy lifting to Ed and you. On Monday, September 24, 2012 1:48:19 PM UTC-7, Terry wrote: > > On Mon, 24 Sep 2012 11:47:45 -0700 (PDT) > "F.S." <██████████@████████> wrote: > > > The scroll issue was getting unbearable for me so I tried switching back > to > > older versions. As of Leo 4.8 final the scroll issue is not present but > it > > is in Leo 4.9. So for now I will be using Leo 4.8 instead. I back ported > > Terry Brown's fix to qt log printing and so far I am happy with 4.8. > > > > Hopefully this could give some clue on what may be the cause (problem > > should be in the diff between 4.8 and 4.9). > > I agree this is a horrible problem that needs fixing, if I encountered > it early in an inspection of Leo I'd drop the thing as unfinished. > > FS - I think you posted a file that exhibited the problem, but I don't > think it was exhibiting the problem for me, which might make sense if > it's related to font heights etc. > > Yep, I just found your file, and it's still not doing it for me. I'll > have to make a point of trying to pin it down next time I encounter > it. Usually it's when I'm in a hurry and just tolerate it until I move > on to another node. > > FS - if you use bzr, can't remember if you do, it doesn't take that > long to pin down the exact revision where the problem came in, say the > current rev. is 5800 and you don't see the problem in 4200, you test > 5100, then 4700, then 4400 etc. - because you essentially cut the > search space in half every time it doesn't take that many tests. > That's what I'll do next time I see it happening, unless you beat me to > it. > > Cheers -Terry > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/leo-editor/-/VPUCf8dCDhkJ. 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.
