On 5/25/07, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> "Stefan" == Stefan Schimanski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Stefan> I don't like the reference to the BufferView cursor. cursorX
Stefan> gets a arbitrary CursorSlice. It shouldn't depend on the
Stefan> cursor or some other sideconditions.
I was about to send a message along the same lines, but I wanted first
to look a bit better at the RtL situation.
Stefan> If I understand correctly: cursorX is called for the cursor
Stefan> itself and for the selection anchor. For the latter it makes a
Stefan> difference if the cursor is inside the inset or outside. So
Stefan> somehow this fix looks like being at the wrong position, i.e.
Stefan> it should be handled where the cursorX for the selection is
Stefan> called. Otherwise in 6 months somebody else will fall over
Stefan> another symptom fix without a real cure of the problem.
Maybe it's a problem with the code flow. Actually, the whole idea of
"patching" the cursor position in RtL paragraph seems wrong to me. One
should IMHO, to calculate the position it should've been if everything
was English, and then to reverse it (subtract the window width with
it, etc.). But that's how it's done now, and changing it would be a
lot of work (maybe I'll do that for 1.6 if you'll want).
And the fact is, I MUST get to know where the cursor is exactly. I
absolutely must. There's a difference with the return value of the
function when the cursor is in an inset, and we're calling cursorX,
and when the cursor is in the cursorslice we're getting. If we don't
know that we can't solve the bug.
Yes.
JMarc
