[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ewoc patch
From: |
Tom Breton (Tehom) |
Subject: |
Re: ewoc patch |
Date: |
Wed, 9 Dec 2009 15:57:35 -0500 |
User-agent: |
SquirrelMail/1.4.19 |
> Not sure what you mean by "blank" entries. If you mean entries which
> don't get printed (i.e. "invisilbe" entries), then yes, it's
> a limitation that it would be good to lift. IIUC you lift it by:
Yes, I meant entries that print nothing and have no separator.
>> * Design: Nodes that have no text have no start marker.
>
> which I think is a good solution (when I tried to lift that limitation
> it didn't occur to me, so I tried to manually separate the markers that
> needed to move from those that needed to stay put and it was messy).
I bet it was messy. That was the first approach I tried.
>> * ewoc-map is slightly misnamed; it doesn't map, it's more like
>> for-each.
>
> It's the historical name. To fit with other macros (like dotimes,
> dolist), we could call it ewoc-do rather than ewoc-foreach.
Fair enough. But ISTM that while `ewoc-for-each' can have the same
signature as `ewoc-map' has now, `ewoc-do' would be expected to have a
signature like dolist and dotimes. Ie, to be used like:
(ewoc-do (element ewoc)
(do-stuff-to element))
So ewoc-for-each was just an alias but ewoc-do would require more.
>> * Added a version number. I didn't have much to go on, so I just
>> said it was "2.0". I will gladly change it to correspond to an
>> official version number.
>
> The Emacs package generally doesn't like version numbers, so I'd rather
> not introduce one here, unless there's really a good reason for it.
I added it so that other packages that wanted or needed a variable
separator could tell whether it was available. Otherwise they would make
errors if an old ewoc.el was loaded. If you have a better way in mind,
I'll use it.
>> * Added a new field to the ewoc, "separator". That's the string that
>> separates entries. It defaults to "\n".
>
> IIUC it can also be the empty string, right? IIUC, the current ewoc.el
> already makes it possible to get rid of the separator. Making it
> an argument might be a good idea as well.
Yes, I think so too.
>> Testing:
>
>> * Created a test suite. The suite relies on rtest, which
>> unfortunately is still between releasable versions.
>
> We still don't have a testsuite in Emacs, but we'll gladly add the
> testsuite to our repository (we have a `test' subdirectory for that).
Sure. But it uses my tester package rtest; there is an old version of
rtest out there but I'm using my new version that is still in flux.
(Which, circularly, is the reason I wanted to make ewoc more flexible)
>> diff -c -b /home/tehom/emacs-21.4/lisp/emacs-lisp/ewoc.el
>> /home/tehom/projects/emtest/lisp/viewe
Will emacs 22.2 be sufficient?
Tom Breton (Tehom)
- ewoc patch, Tom Breton (Tehom), 2009/12/08
- Re: ewoc patch (Was wrong patch, right one attached), Tom Breton (Tehom), 2009/12/08
- Re: ewoc patch, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/08
- Re: ewoc patch,
Tom Breton (Tehom) <=
- Re: ewoc patch, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/09
- Re: ewoc patch, Tom Breton (Tehom), 2009/12/09
- Re: ewoc patch, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/10
- Re: ewoc patch, Tom Breton (Tehom), 2009/12/10
- Re: ewoc patch, Stefan Monnier, 2009/12/11