I've looked at this and I'm still not sure how to handle snapshots
navigation in an "intuitive" way.

Actually how it works (assume an initial state S0):
- when you create a new snapshot (TWMWorldRecorder>>snapshot) the new
snapshot is on top, this one is OK. Let's call it snapshot S1

- now go back / left arrow (TWMWorldRecorder>>backward) *without moving any
window*, easy we go to S0. Go forward, we're at S1.

- now move a window and go back. As I don't want to loose the current
state, an automatic snapshot (S2) is created so we can go back to current
state later. This behavior is not intuitive I think (do two things) but
often I forgot to do the snapshot before going backward.... so with this
done automatically nothing is lost. (winner-mode in Emacs has this
behavior).

- go to S3. Then move some windows and delete. If automatically TWM restore
last snapshot, we loose current state.....

At least, automatic restore on delete is easy:

TWMWorldRecorder >>deleteCurrentSnapshot
(self snapshots size = 1) not  ifTrue: [
 self snapshots remove:  self currentSnapshot.
self currentPosition:  self currentPosition - 1.
 self restoreCurrentSnapshot.   "<--- add this line"
]


Experimentations still neeeded......


Another idea is to have TWMWorldRecorder plugged to announcements so each
time a window move / appear / disappear it creates automatically a
snapshot....


Cheers,

Laurent

On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 4:57 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]>wrote:

> Snapshots are cool!
>
> But try this:
> 1. create two snapshots
> 2. navigate to the last one
> 3. delete it
>
> Although it is shown removed from the list (i.e. "1/1"), you are not
> automatically navigated back to the first one. You stay on the deleted one,
> and when you navigate back to the first with the arrow, the deleted one
> reappears in the list (i.e. "1/2")
>
> Sean
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://forum.world.st/TWM-bug-when-deleting-a-snapshot-tp4243197p4243197.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>

Reply via email to