On 11/26/2010 08:54 PM, Steven wrote:
Hi,
>>> After more testing, this part of the first line of
>> ::tree::refresh seems to be problematic:
>>> wm stackorder .
>>>
>>> If I place just that line at the beginning I get the
>> same message:
> Is there a reason here to use stackorder ?
> It should probably be removed if problematic on some operating
> systems. I use something simple like
>
> proc ::tree::refresh {{ baseNumber {} }} {
> if {$baseNumber != {} } {
> if {[winfo exists .treeWin$baseNumber]} {
> ::tree::dorefresh $baseNumber
> }
> } else {
> for {set i 1} {$i<= [sc_base count total]} {incr i} {
> if {[winfo exists .treeWin$i]} {
> ::tree::dorefresh $i
> }
> }
> }
> }
>
> But it has been complicated a little since adding Fulvio's tree
> speedup code and "sc_tree search -cancel all" etc.
> *Exactly* what Fulvio is doing i haven't gone into, and while
> his speedup is a nice feature, i think someone else reported a
> bug with it regarding "game 0" getting erased after delayed tree completion.
> It'd be nice if he
He? O, he :-)
Oct 8 it was, subject "Bug: New game destroyed upon tree completion"
I have not analysed it at all.
Joost.
> could post about these issues :>
>
> Steve
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500!
Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by
optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the
Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Scid-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
