4:19 p.m.
the evil yes/no infinite loop should finally be gone.
i also bowdlerized the supposedly insulting text i put in before,
and implemented a new callback scheme for widgets. the :callback-ex
keyword specifies a function or form that is passed two arguments,
the image instance that was clicked on or otherwise invoked, and
the corresponding event (for the moment, a misc-user event that
invokes the callback). this obviates the need for the horrid
widget-callback-current-channel.
finally, i fixed a typo (boundp instead of fboundp) introduced in a recent
patch.
--
Ben
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my mail. I also write
as succinctly as possible -- please don't be offended. If you send me
mail, you _will_ get a response, but please be patient, especially for
XEmacs-related mail. If you need an immediate response and it is not
apparent in your message, please say so. Thanks for your understanding.
See also http://www.666.com/ben/typing.html.
8:16 p.m.
At 08:19 AM 4/28/00 -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
the evil yes/no infinite loop should finally be gone.
i also bowdlerized the supposedly insulting text i put in before,
and implemented a new callback scheme for widgets. the :callback-ex
keyword specifies a function or form that is passed two arguments,
the image instance that was clicked on or otherwise invoked, and
the corresponding event (for the moment, a misc-user event that
invokes the callback). this obviates the need for the horrid
widget-callback-current-channel.
Hmmn, I appear to have fixed this also. I don't particularly like this
scheme, but as long as normal callbacks continue to work I won't veto.
I have a mega-patch pending, so you may want to apply other changes soon.
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Principal Consultant, BEA Systems Ltd
4:05 a.m.
Andy Piper wrote:
At 08:19 AM 4/28/00 -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
>the evil yes/no infinite loop should finally be gone.
>
>i also bowdlerized the supposedly insulting text i put in before,
>and implemented a new callback scheme for widgets. the :callback-ex
>keyword specifies a function or form that is passed two arguments,
>the image instance that was clicked on or otherwise invoked, and
>the corresponding event (for the moment, a misc-user event that
>invokes the callback). this obviates the need for the horrid
>widget-callback-current-channel.
Hmmn, I appear to have fixed this also. I don't particularly like this
scheme, but as long as normal callbacks continue to work I won't veto.
it sounds like you created a different design. can you describe it?
I have a mega-patch pending, so you may want to apply other changes soon.
none that are so closely attached to widgets.
i do have my own mega-patch, which does a lot of things to event-msw.c and a lot
of other files, e.g. adds new error-trapping stuff around a lot of code. i'm
finally about to get the changelog for this done.
so basically, don't do any reindentation changes or major rearrangement of code
in your mega patch, and don't worry about the rest; it should merge without too
much difficulty.
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Principal Consultant, BEA Systems Ltd
--
Ben
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my mail. I also write
as succinctly as possible -- please don't be offended. If you send me
mail, you _will_ get a response, but please be patient, especially for
XEmacs-related mail. If you need an immediate response and it is not
apparent in your message, please say so. Thanks for your understanding.
See also http://www.666.com/ben/chronic-pain/
10:55 a.m.
At 08:05 PM 4/30/00 -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
it sounds like you created a different design. can you describe it?
I simply used your suggestion of using event-channel on the current event
and using (interactive "e"). This works quite well, but given that you have
implemented the other stuff I backed out the changes. I think putting the
image instance in a hash table is the Right Thing. Either way it works.
Viva consumer choice.
> I have a mega-patch pending, so you may want to apply other
changes soon.
none that are so closely attached to widgets.
i do have my own mega-patch, which does a lot of things to event-msw.c and
a lot
of other files, e.g. adds new error-trapping stuff around a lot of
code. i'm
finally about to get the changelog for this done.
so basically, don't do any reindentation changes or major rearrangement of
code
in your mega patch, and don't worry about the rest; it should
merge
without too
much difficulty.
Ok that will be cool. My patch should fix a lot of the GC problems that
people (e.g. John A. Turner) have been seeing, since I have gone through
the instantiation / deletion behaviour with a fine tooth comb and recoded a
lot of it. Maybe after both patches are in widgets will be reasonably stable.
This may be my last patch for a while, my wife may be in labour .....
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Principal Consultant, BEA Systems Ltd
9:45 a.m.
andy, i'd suggest you go ahead and put in support for (interactive "e") if
it's
not there already. that way we can have them both around and evaluate them, and
once they're in actual use it should be more clear which
one is the better solution. i'm not esp. attached to my solution. maybe we could
just extend the event to include the widget it was referenced off of (esp. once we
separate out misc-user event into different types of
events, like we should have long ago).
ben
Andy Piper wrote:
At 08:05 PM 4/30/00 -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
>it sounds like you created a different design. can you describe it?
I simply used your suggestion of using event-channel on the current event
and using (interactive "e"). This works quite well, but given that you have
implemented the other stuff I backed out the changes. I think putting the
image instance in a hash table is the Right Thing. Either way it works.
Viva consumer choice.
>> I have a mega-patch pending, so you may want to apply other changes soon.
>
>none that are so closely attached to widgets.
>
>i do have my own mega-patch, which does a lot of things to event-msw.c and
a lot
>of other files, e.g. adds new error-trapping stuff around a lot of code. i'm
>finally about to get the changelog for this done.
>
>so basically, don't do any reindentation changes or major rearrangement of
code
>in your mega patch, and don't worry about the rest; it should merge
without too
>much difficulty.
Ok that will be cool. My patch should fix a lot of the GC problems that
people (e.g. John A. Turner) have been seeing, since I have gone through
the instantiation / deletion behaviour with a fine tooth comb and recoded a
lot of it. Maybe after both patches are in widgets will be reasonably stable.
This may be my last patch for a while, my wife may be in labour .....
andy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Andy Piper
Principal Consultant, BEA Systems Ltd
--
Ben
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my mail. I also write
as succinctly as possible -- please don't be offended. If you send me
mail, you _will_ get a response, but please be patient, especially for
XEmacs-related mail. If you need an immediate response and it is not
apparent in your message, please say so. Thanks for your understanding.
See also http://www.666.com/ben/chronic-pain/
8970
days inactive
8974
days old
4 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Andy Piper -
Ben Wing