+0200, Holger Berndt wrote:
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Roadmap [2], I now shot
ahead and created an undo proposal page [3
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:57:44 +0200 ecyrbe wrote:
Easy Undo/Redo framework are usually based on Inheritance...
I don't have any statistics, but surely, there are many frameworks
based on inheritance, and many others that aren't. The question is
more: Does it make sense to base it on inheritance
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Holger Berndt bern...@gmx.de wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:57:44 +0200 ecyrbe wrote:
[...]
Anyway, i don't see the value of adding it to GLib, as undo
frameworks are only an abstraction, and users end-up doing the
painfull job of implementing undo commands for
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 7:40 AM, Holger Berndt bern...@gmx.de wrote:
On Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:57:44 +0200 ecyrbe wrote:
Easy Undo/Redo framework are usually based on Inheritance...
I don't have any statistics, but surely, there are many frameworks
based on inheritance, and many others that
On Mo, 21.06.2010 14:48, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
- Your stack will behave consistently with other applications using the
same stack implementation.
This is entirely speculative,
What I meant by consistent behaviour was the undo stack policy (e.g.
conventional against emacs-style). This
On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Holger Berndt bern...@gmx.de wrote:
[...]
[...]
You don't want your business logic driven by your onscreen widgets
haphazardly this way - you need your undo/redo stack to interface with
your internal data model - and you want your views to be synchronized
to the
On Mo, 21.06.2010 16:29, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
What happens when you have multiple buffers editing separate
but interdependent project data ? Is the new code introduced
to be so complex that it will handle the interleaving of commands
on separate datasets into a single stack ?
No, I don't
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 22:01 +0200, Holger Berndt wrote:
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Roadmap [2], I now shot
ahead and created an undo proposal
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Roadmap [2], I now shot
ahead and created an undo proposal page [3] for that. Comments are very
welcome.
Holger
[1
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 10:01:39PM +0200, Holger Berndt wrote:
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Roadmap [2], I now shot
ahead and created an undo
On 06/16/2010 10:01 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part of the GTK+ Roadmap [2], I now shot
ahead and created an undo proposal page [3
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Martin Nordholts ense...@gmail.com wrote:
On 06/16/2010 10:01 PM, Holger Berndt wrote:
Some time ago, there was some discussion about a generic undo stack in
GTK+ [1]. The talk back then didn't result in more concrete API
discussion. As undo/redo is part
On 06/16/2010 10:49 PM, Tristan Van Berkom wrote:
For instance, consider '+' = do and '-' = undo:
4 7
| /
3 5
|/
2
|
1
Would translate to: +1 -- +2 -- +3 -- +4 -- -4 -- -3 -- +5 -- +7
It would be inconvenient to perform operations on that representation of
a tree
Hi Martin,
On Do, 17.06.2010 07:13, Martin Nordholts wrote:
I'm also sceptical. There are too many different ways to implement Undo.
The generic solution would only represent one way, which doesn't make it
generic enough IMO.
The question is: Do they really NEED it in different ways, or are
14 matches
Mail list logo
