On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 11:14:14AM +0100, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
> 
> >> hasParagraphs is never used in the code, and we need numParagraphs
> >> for having PosIterator/Cursor::operator--
> > 
> > Who could possibly object? Go for it.
> 
> The ways of objections are misterious... ;-) I'll do it then.
> 
> >> PS: should I drop PosIterator and try to make Cursor::operator++/--
> >> operative?
> > 
> > Why not make PosIterator fully functional and then think about
> 
> I'm doing this already: I think PosIterator in the patch I sent yesterday is
> fully functional (the patch has some bugs in putting the selection at the
> end of a successful search but that's another story).
> 
> [Btw, it should be super easy to implement regex searches right? It would
> suffice to implement operator* that gives pit->getChar(pos) if pos < size
> and some '\n' if pos == size. In that way one could also search for
> newlines etc. Methink.]
> 
> > implementing Cursor in terms of PosIterator?
> 
> My concern is that Andr� has already started implementing Cursor in his own
> way, and maybe his way is better. [In any case, they are very similar I
> think]. But I don't want to interfere with anybody's plans.

To be honest: Your ideas in this particular areas have not

> If I could only get Andr� to comment what are his future plans on this...

Sorry. Public holiday interfered ;-}

>From what I can see now, your PosIterator should be usable as a base for
a cursor, even if I'd prefer paroffsets at the beginning to make it
easier to debug'.

A cursor should either a pair (mathed-style) or a triple (outer
world-style) of these iterators (one for the cursor poisition, the other
one or two for the selection). The cursor belongs to the BufferView, so
multiple views would mean multiple cursors.  A cursor will have a few
helper functions, most notably 'dispatch'. This dispatch() handles
'dispatch to the innermost inset able to handle an FuncRequest' as well
as the replacement for inset unocking etc after FINISHED_RIGHT etc.

Andre'

Reply via email to