Hi Viktor,
Ok.
Best regards,
Xavi
El 05/04/2010 0:12, Viktor Szakáts escribió:
Hi,
Me neither, I guess that Tortoise always makes the patch with the latest
version... I correct it manually, no problem.
Maybe it's better to do all the changes in the repository or don't change any
in a file under discussion. I don't know.
The best is to send .diffs against latest source tree:
svn update
svn diff> patch.dif
(and .zip it or paste it if it's only for review and short)
conditional code for layered mode (why?) and you still try
to force your setcancel hack. It also employs trick to track
focus, and I'm not sure I like it.
Conditional compiler time code with layered mode is to link the two issues.
Use layered model by the buffer like a opaque window when is not opaque until
remove the attribute.
It's also faster without WS_EX_LAYERED and simple not have to check if exist
WS_EX_LAYERED and not exit WS_EX_COMPOSITED.
I want to record in the code, in the form of a conditional compiler time, the
option.
Please don't add new knobs, I'm working hard to remove them,
and for the sake of maintainability and to avoid unnecessary
build-types, such built-time knobs are not welcome in the code.
It's not a whim. I've help and moved many codes Clipper to Harbour. I don't
know what answer when asked to why left the execution of a code-protected by
SetCancel(.F.)/SetCancel(.T.) when clicked [X] on title windows bar. I say that
use SET CLOSABLE OFF new in Harbour but they say it's too easy to forget and
the codes are already written. Then I think why not say so in public devel-list
but... I also think it is better to keep quiet because it's my job. :(
UpdateCaret try create caret when is in the background, I like to keep clean
Windows LastError whenever possible and easy. In problems like this can be
important. Trick to track focus allow this, can also be interesting to know
this condition.
I find it rather offensive/disturbing that you keep posting
this piece of code for the 5th time, while it's clearly
against concept and project goals and you can't address
any of the concerns I raised here several times (and which
I won't repeat this time). Moreover it doesn't bring anything
new to Harbour, just limits current features by tying to
different settings into one.
In my view the SVN should contain stuff which is useful
for most users, and stuff which we've agreed upon, and not
support for special personal needs or undiscussed (rogue)
changes at will. If you don't agree with this and/or with
major directions of development, it's best to keep a local
patch on your system (and optionally publish these patches
and binaries for interested users, if there are any). This
is one of the advantages of open source.
Brgds,
Viktor
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list (attachment size limit: 40KB)
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
