* [sup-talk] redo ideas
[not found] <200904271244.n3RCi1VO027803@smtp6.server.rpi.edu>
@ 2009-04-27 19:47 ` Nicolas Pouillard
2009-04-29 18:22 ` William Morgan
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Pouillard @ 2009-04-27 19:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
Excerpts from Mike S's message of Mon Apr 27 14:43:46 +0200 2009:
> I'm graduating in a few weeks, so I'll have some free time I can dedicate
> to sup again.
>
> Recently redo functionality was suggested, I believe this was meant to be
> a solution for something, but I have been thinking about it for a while.
> I'd like to register Ctrl-R to keep with the vim bindings.
Just some thoughts about this... I was more thinking about the repeat feature
of Vi/Vim (the '.' command) than the redo one.
Two other ways of doing the undo/redo:
1/ Save the actions using a data type that we can inverse.
Example in Ruby syntax
a = Action.add_labels(:foo, :bar)
a.apply # actually do the job
a.invert # equals to Action.remove_labels(:foo, :bar)
2/ Save the state (has to be defined) at each action.
This solution would be limited to actions where the state is manageable.
Best regards,
--
Nicolas Pouillard
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* [sup-talk] redo ideas
[not found] <200904271244.n3RCi1VO027803@smtp6.server.rpi.edu>
2009-04-27 19:47 ` [sup-talk] redo ideas Nicolas Pouillard
@ 2009-04-29 18:22 ` William Morgan
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: William Morgan @ 2009-04-29 18:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
Reformatted excerpts from Mike S's message of 2009-04-27:
> I'm graduating in a few weeks, so I'll have some free time I can
> dedicate to sup again.
Congrats! Great!
> I'd like to register Ctrl-R to keep with the vim bindings.
Sure.
> Ugly method 2: write code in duplicate, register a redo and call redo
> This saves duplication of code, but it seems unnecessarily complex.
>
> * create undo lambda
> * create redo lambda
> * register undo and redo, but 'queue up' redo
> * UndoManager.redo
Redo is actually a slightly different operation from do. Do has to ask
for user input (what label do you want to apply?), redo just reuses it.
Maybe that's not such a big deal though; do/redo can just check to see
if it already has the value from the user, and ask if not.
> Slightly clever method: have primitives return their own undo/redo.
> This can be seen in toggle_starred where actually_toggle_starred
> returns its inverse. This shifts the complexity down and keeps higher
> level code clean.
That sounds eminently reasonable to me.
--
William <wmorgan-sup at masanjin.net>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-04-29 18:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <200904271244.n3RCi1VO027803@smtp6.server.rpi.edu>
2009-04-27 19:47 ` [sup-talk] redo ideas Nicolas Pouillard
2009-04-29 18:22 ` William Morgan
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox