On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 12:42:48PM -0500, Kuba Ober wrote: > On Thursday 30 October 2003 11:26 am, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > > Angus Leeming wrote: > > > Note that multiple BufferViews implies multiple Cursors. I'm sure > > > that I would be pissed off if I replaced "brown" with "red" in one > > > window and found that the cursor in my other BufferView had also > > > changed position. > > > > That's a very good point. > > I think that the only real solution is that the tree must know of its > iterators and adjust them if tree structure changes.
Too complicated for my taste. [Actually that's what Asger's has been proposing for ages, and even if I agree this would work, it breaks 'KISS'...] 'Really stable cursors' is more than we need. We need to behave them nicely in a well-defined set of cases, in which e.g. integer-offset based cursors are 'stable enough'. We should try to use the simplest solution which is technically feasible. The offset-based version is feasible and simpler than registering iterators with the tree. > Does it make any sense? Yes. > Is that the direction you are going? No. > Am I talking rubbish? No. [Everything just my opinion] Andre'
