Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 06:43:53PM -0400, rgheck wrote:
/// Only used in case of full backups
- BufferParams bparams;
+ BufferParams & bparams;
I know it was my doing at some point of time, but can't bparams be
a plain pointer similar to the MathData and the ParagraphList we
have already in there?
That was my question of yesterday.
Can a UndoElement outlive it's buffer?
I think it can't and if it can then there's a design problem. The
attached patch works fine for me.
Abdel.
Andre'
Index: src/Undo.cpp
===================================================================
--- src/Undo.cpp (revision 25531)
+++ src/Undo.cpp (working copy)
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@
MathData * ar, BufferParams const & bp,
bool ifb) :
kind(kin), cursor(cur), cell(cel), from(fro), end(en),
- pars(pl), array(ar), bparams(bp), isFullBuffer(ifb)
+ pars(pl), array(ar), bparams(&bp), isFullBuffer(ifb)
{}
/// Which kind of operation are we recording for?
UndoKind kind;
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@
/// the contents of the saved MathData (for mathed)
MathData * array;
/// Only used in case of full backups
- BufferParams bparams;
+ BufferParams const * bparams;
/// Only used in case of full backups
bool isFullBuffer;
private:
@@ -321,8 +321,8 @@
if (undo.isFullBuffer) {
LASSERT(undo.pars, /**/);
// This is a full document
- otherstack.top().bparams = buffer_.params();
- buffer_.params() = undo.bparams;
+ otherstack.top().bparams = &buffer_.params();
+ buffer_.params() = *undo.bparams;
swap(buffer_.paragraphs(), *undo.pars);
delete undo.pars;
undo.pars = 0;
