On 3/23/07, bulia byak <buliabyak@...400...> wrote:
On 3/23/07, julien robert <julienrob@...400...> wrote:
I began its implementation, but as i'm not sure to do it in the right
way,
i would like to discuss with someone having a better vision of the
source
code than mine.
I see you are mostly working with undo code there. This approach is certainly more general that "repeat the last verb" because undo records all actions, while verbs exist for only a subset of all actions. However, here lies a problem: undo log only records the (possibly labelled and keyed) changes in the XML tree and nothing else. It does not remember which object the action was applied to, and thus it cannot reapply the same action to a different object. And without this, this functionality will be of very limited use. How are you planning to attack this?
I'm not sure to follow you... actually, i'm not using undo log for repeating and i'm just recording every event when it is submitted in the 'sp_document_done' function, so that i can remember more or less everything, and reapply the action to different objects (this is done by defining different Event objects -in event.h-, each corresponding to a different action, and storing the necessary variables to be able to call the corresponding function with the good arguments when repeating on a new object/selection). Does this make sense ?
Also, from a cursory look at your patch, it's quite big and seems to
have stuff that does not belong, such as differences in clone transforms. This is likely because the SVN head has diverged during the time you were working on the patch. You need to merge all the latest changes into your working copy before diffing, otherwise your patch may inadvertently revert some of the changes in SVN.
Really sorry about that, i forgot to do it. Btw How can i keep the modification on other things so that it wont appear in the patch without deleting it in my working copy (i want to take a look at it later..) ? Do you want the patch without this disturbing part (which actually represent few lines of this -quite big- patch)?