>>>>> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Martin> Alternatively, should we really try to interpret every boolean
Martin> that gets returned somewhere as a sign that the screen needs
Martin> updating?
I do not like how this is basically removing Andre's effort of
avoiding updates for no particular reason.
As I understand it, it goes like:
* beginning of LyXText::dispatch
bool needsUpdate = !lyxaction.funcHasFlag(cmd.action,
LyXAction::NoUpdate);
So we have marked in LyXAction some lfuns which have no reason to
require an update.
* handling of such an lfun
case LFUN_UP_PARAGRAPH:
if (!cur.mark())
cur.clearSelection();
needsUpdate = cursorUpParagraph(cur);
finishChange(cur, false);
break;
needsUpdate was false in this case, we set it to true only if DEPM
triggered.
* end of LyXFunc::dispatch
default: {
view()->cursor().dispatch(cmd);
update |= view()->cursor().result().update();
if (!view()->cursor().result().dispatched())
update |= view()->dispatch(cmd);
break;
}
}
if (view()->available()) {
// Redraw screen unless explicitly told otherwise.
// This also initializes the position cache for all
insets
// in (at least partially) visible top-level paragraphs.
if (update)
view()->update(Update::FitCursor |
Update::Force);
else
view()->update(Update::FitCursor);
We dispatch to the cursor position, and look at the result. Depending
on this result, we do the required update (seeing whether we changed
screen is handled by Update::FitCursor of course).
So my question is what is _your_ vision of the update mechanism. I
guess I do not understand why you change the logic in
BufferView::Pimpl::update.
JMarc
