> [sigh] Didn't I tell you not to run off and implement this stuff for a few
> days so we could have time to think about it. ;-)
;-) Things as they were were just toooooooo nasty! I blame you for pointing
out just how nasty!
> An alternative fix would be by making
> Signal1<void, bool> updateBufferDependent;
> What do you think of this?
Magnificent idea! Clean, simple and elegant.
> Why is it then that you wanted to add an ihSignal_ in FormInset when it
> would make more sense to just make the connection in the appropriate
> showInset() like it used to be done? Over zealous perhaps?
Well, it struck me that all those insets with dialogs will emit a hide signal
when deleted or cut, so the right place to connect this signal to the dialog
itself would be in FormInset::connect(). Unfortunately, the base Inset class
does not have a hide signal (ie, no &Inset::hide), so I had to obtain
&InsetXXX::hide in the various showInset() methods (stored as ihSignal_) and
then connect it in FormInset::connect().
I know... kludgy! However, I think that the idea is basically correct. The
right place to connect ih_ IS in Form::Inset::connect(). All that needs to be
done is to make an Inset::hide signal rather than have all those
InsetXXX::hide signals.
My turn to ask: what do you think of this?
Angus
