On Wed, Jul 02, 2003 at 07:02:37PM +0200, Edwin Leuven wrote:
> On Wed Jul 2 2003 18:49, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> > Could you show me the contents of ev_in here?
>
> (gdb) print ev_in
> $1 = (const FuncRequest &) @0xbfffdf18: {view_ = 0x0, action = 217,
> argument = {static npos = 4294967295,
> _M_dataplus = {<allocator<char>> = {<No data fields>},
> _M_p = 0x8372a6c ""}, static _S_empty_rep_storage = {0, 0, 0, 0}},
> x = 47, y = 157, button_ = button1}
Ok, view_ is 0.
Well, I think this is a genuine bug unrelated to the patch that just went
unnoticed so far.
After the BufferView gets a 'anonymous' FuncRequest, it should claim
resposibility:
@@ -850,7 +978,11 @@ bool BufferView::Pimpl::workAreaDispatch
screen().hideCursor();
- bool const res = dispatch(ev_in);
+ // Make sure that the cached BufferView is correct.
+ FuncRequest ev = ev_in;
+ ev.setView(bv_);
+
+ bool const res = dispatch(ev);
The same is done further down in localDispatch...
Ok. I think I'll just commit this change. Could you try again (later)?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have,
nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
