On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 04:58:22PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > >>>>> "Martin" == Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Martin> Sort of. But how would you do that? And how would you achieve > Martin> this while preserving one-paragraph update where that is what > Martin> you want? I sort of see what you are hinting at, but I have no > Martin> idea how to do it. > > Martin> Could you demonstrate it by "fixing" one occurrence I inserted > Martin> of an explicit update call? > > I do not know how to fix it, so I'll ask questions instead :) > > case LFUN_UP_PARAGRAPH: > if (!cur.mark()) > cur.clearSelection(); > needsUpdate = cursorUpParagraph(cur); > + cur.bv().update(Update::Force | Update::FitCursor); > finishChange(cur, false); > break; > > > So here we have code that tries carefully to update only if > cursorUpParagraph says so, and then you issue what looks to me as a > full update. Why do you need to do that? Could you explain what you > are doing in this special case?
OK ... I get it.
Changed the code as follows:
case LFUN_UP_PARAGRAPH:
if (!cur.mark())
cur.clearSelection();
needsUpdate = cursorUpParagraph(cur);
lyxerr << "needsUpdate=" << needsUpdate << endl;
//cur.bv().update(Update::Force | Update::FitCursor);
finishChange(cur, false);
break;
As I understand it, the idea is that if a paragraph up motion takes the
cursor off-screen, needsUpdate should become true. Right?
It doesn't... and the screen doesn't scroll up with the update stmt
commented out.
Is this a bug inside cursorUpParagraph?
- Martin
pgppDB4hkdT3Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
