John Darrington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The difference is I suppose, in the way we've approached the problem. > In my proposal, I've put the burden on the UI programmer to predeclare > the actions of a block of code; "I'm about to enter something into a > cell". Whereas perhaps you can think of a better way to determine that > an error was provoked by an attempt to enter data into a cell for > which it was not appropriate.
I'm not sure. Based on this paragraph, your contexts sound similar to mine: both describe the *context* in which an error occurred. But your original description (quoted below) said a message context is a "message reporting policy" that says how a message should be *displayed*. To me, those seem that they should be separate. Maybe (likely) I don't understand your description. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 1. There'll be a new construct, which I'll call a "message context". > Each message context contains a double ended queue of messages. > Each context has its own message reporting policy. The policy can > decide that: > > * Messages are reported FIFO. > > * Messages are reported LIFO. > > * Only the most recent message is reported. > > * Messages are not reported at all. > > etc. Further, a context can specify the manner in which messages are > reported, eg: dialog box, scrolled list, log file or combination > thereof. -- "The road to hell is paved with convenient shortcuts." --Peter da Silva _______________________________________________ pspp-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pspp-dev
