On Tue, Aug 26, 2003 at 11:01:36AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > This means that anything not using the dispatch mechanism at all (like
> > signals) or anything being handled 'too early' (as the scrolling) does
> > not trigger an update/redraw.
>
> There is no technical problem in refactoring th
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> This means that anything not using the dispatch mechanism at all (like
> signals) or anything being handled 'too early' (as the scrolling) does
> not trigger an update/redraw.
There is no technical problem in refactoring this code so that it uses the
dispatch mechanism rat
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> At least for the main text we'll probaby need it.
> Apart from that, speed is pretty good now, isn't it?
>
Once I get the file loaded, speed seems fine.
Somebody fixed the scrollbar problem. Yeah!
Clicking inside a table does not seem perfect. It usually takes two
tries to
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 01:36:16PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > But a setCursor() seems to be missing as well..
>
> Why do we need a setCursor while scrolling?
If the "cursor follows scrollbar" option is set we should do that,
shouldn't we? [But I have to admit I
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> But a setCursor() seems to be missing as well..
Why do we need a setCursor while scrolling?
> The problem with these fancy signal stuff is that they dont' hit the
> 'update' 'catch all' in the dispatch()
Huh? I feel more ignorant than before. Can you explain better?
Reg
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 12:30:13PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> > Looks good. Please commit.
>
> Done.
>
> Btw, do you have an idea of why moving the scrollbar doesn't redraw?
Not really.
Well, I recently removed lots of 'update' related calls from all over
the place, I guess there was on
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> At least for the main text we'll probaby need it.
> Apart from that, speed is pretty good now, isn't it?
Seems ok, but I must admit that I don't know really (I'm using lyx on a fast
computer, and didn't use CVS in the dark slow times for comparation). I
guess that we should
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 11:27:33AM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > I don't knowt. Actually, something like this was the original plan when
> > introducing the y-less getRow() but then I noticed that we need the
> > other version in a few cases as the y caches where ou
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> I don't knowt. Actually, something like this was the original plan when
> introducing the y-less getRow() but then I noticed that we need the
> other version in a few cases as the y caches where out-of-sync
> sometimes. Maybe that's better nowadays.
Ok. AFAICS, the problem
On Mon, Aug 25, 2003 at 09:42:01AM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> Stupid monday questionary
>
> 1: why don't we update all row y positions on full rebreak?
No particular reason. It's just that these two chunks of code just
recently arrived from completely unrelated regions in the original co
10 matches
Mail list logo
