On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 11:18 PM, Sam Mason
<sam@...2002...> wrote:
On Fri, Jun 12, 2009 at 09:47:48PM +0200, JimmyVolatile wrote:
> Ok. Suggestion: Always give priority to oldests history when re-doing.
>
> If the user does 10 undos and 2 re-dos he'd be at "undo-step" 8. He then
> does some operation, say, move a shape 1 pixel. He's now at step 1 of a new
> branch of actions. He presses undo 1 or more times, going back to the
> original history branching point or even beyond. The newest branch is at
> this point deleted and if the user presses redo again 8+ times, he'll be
> back at where he started before undo-ing.
>
> I do not know if this is a good idea but at least it is non-intrusive to the
> user....
I'm struggling to follow the example, but it sounds a lot like the way
Emacs handles undo/redo---i.e. they're the same, you undo to undo undos!
It's nice for some tasks, but would be a major deviation from almost
every graphical program I've used, and in that regard it's probably a
bad UI design choice but it's not so novel that nobody has tried it
before.
--
Sam http://samason.me.uk/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------