Armel Asselin: > hum, I do not try to to make anything strange. There are just two cases: > - either I'm in control of the operations and I want to do my stuff within a > BeginUndoAction/EndUndoAction bloc (I ignore all the notifications in this > case), this operation creates an entry in my own stack and I want Scintilla > to have exactly one 'big' entry (i.e. any actions grouped inside a single > transaction). Even if nothing was done at Scintilla level, it should still > keep my empty transaction (because if my code is too dumb to realize nothing > was to be done I prefer that at least Scintilla react as my code)
Couldn't your undo stack record the number of Scintilla actions (either 0 or 1) for each of your actions as well as each of the Scintilla actions not caused by the application? It should then be possible to synchronize when undoing. > for sure if BeginUndoAction is called and the startAction entry is discarded > later because nothing was done, the better would be to wait until a real > action and put the SC_START_ACTION there so that this flag could be really > trusted Yes. I'm willing to change Scintilla's undo if you really need some information that can not be otherwise discovered but I can't yet see that this is required. Neil _______________________________________________ Scintilla-interest mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.lyra.org/mailman/listinfo/scintilla-interest
