> > We will allow more nesting with a HeadingInset with a counter, than with
> > position in a tree: We can only nest to the number of different
> > pointers to Insets we have, and this is typically smaller than the range
> > of an integer.
>
> ??? I don't understand. A tree is defacto unlimited in size.
> The number of pointers is almost always limited the same way as integers
> are.
[This is just a nit-pick discussion. It's purely academic.]
Since pointers have to be aligned to certain boundaries, the
range of valid pointers to insets is typically lower than the
range of valid integers.
Therefor, in the case of unlimited memory, but bounded pointers
and integers, we will allow more nesting with integers.
Of course, nobody will want to nest headings 2^31 times. ;-)
> No, of course not. It gets automagically promoted/demoted to the
> appropriate level at the place of insertion. You just pluck a branch off
> the tree and put it back at another position. The relative structure
> within the branch remains the same - even while being in the clipboard.
This will be confusing for the user. When you copy/paste something,
you expect it to be a verbatim copy. That's why it's called "copy" ;-)
A "logical" paste like you describe could be fun in some situations,
but in general, i think we want the other one.
(Notice also that the logical paste is simple to do with the counter
as well: Just add a constant according to the hosting headings counter.)
> I agree that HeadingInsets with numbers are not that bad at all.
Ok, I think we have settled this issue then:
Headings are not nested in a tree. Instead, we will use counters to
represent the nesting information.
Greets,
Asger
