On Sat, 2007-09-22 at 01:01 +0100, Iain * wrote: > > Do you allow nested undo groups? This is rather important > > if you want to compose actions from smaller actions and still allow > > scripts or other higher levels to combine these into a single undo step. > > We make heavy use of nested undo groups in GIMP. > > We allow one level of nesting, I can see your point about allowing > deeper nesting though and will think about how it could be done. I > suppose this is as much of the "merging" of actions that should take > place, I don't see that the UndoManager itself should support > automatic merging as each application has different requirements for > when a merge should happen, but if we allow multiple nesting of > actions then the applications can merge as they see fit. > > I can see the reason for the non-UI parts to go in GLib, but is there > any precedence in having stuff like this in GLib? If it was to go in > GLib it would be its own seperate library, which for one thing would > kinda suck? > why? we already have gthread, gmodule, glib, gobject, gio....
> As for transactional stuff, I would think that it seems overkill for > most applications, although it'd be great if we could work out some > way to allow those that want it to be able to implement it on top of > the base system. I can't see how you could make it generic enough to > make everyone happy. > this is easy, if the API provides, for instance, a 3-step mechanism: create_context add_stuff close_context thus, normal apps would just call the related 3 functions. More complicated apps would manage different contexts, and be able to associate a context to another one: set_parent_context for instance -- Rodrigo Moya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list