[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.3dev.17

From: T.E.Dickey
Subject: Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.3dev.17
Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 08:55:43 -0500 (EST)

> > I've a handful of configuration/porting issues, but would like to make the 
> > next patch a pre-release.  That would incorporate only bug-fixes... 
> Any chance of putting a short hold until the Visited Page discussion comes 
> to some conclusion? 

sure, if everyone else is busy talking about this one, I'll have time to
work on the configuration/porting issues.
> > * now check directly in postoptions() whether the loaded document is one 
> > from 
> >   which submission of option changes can be accepted, using the new 
> > tracking 
> >   mechanism.  Only the form-based Options Menu and Visited Links are 
> > allowed.  
> I am "uncomfortable" with starting a trend in proliferating the code with 
> calls to postoptions(); someone is going to forget something sometime.  It 
> doesn't seem all that hard to hit 'o'. 

it looks to me rather different: wrapping up some of the redundant code
and putting it into a slightly more orderly arrangement.
> I also question even the need to have the "tree style" as a runtime option. 
> It seems sort of like a general preference to me, and not something that 
> one's going to want to change half a dozen times in one lynx session.  How 
> about lynx.cfg? 
> Was there a compile-time option to drop it?  Like other EXP_ "features," 
> it ought to have one round off-by-default until the clamoring multitudes 
> ask for it. 

no - there was no ifdef (nor was there anyone complaining about it two weeks
ago, so I didn't ifdef it for dev.17).  It's not complicated code, doesn't
change the executable size much, and isnt' a problem to port.
> __Henry 

Thomas E. Dickey

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]