Re: [Gzz] New PEG: containment--benja

[Benja Fallenstein]

Tuomas Lukka wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:56:13PM +0100, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
>  
>
> > Tuomas Lukka wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 05:33:02PM +0100, Benja Fallenstein wrote:
> > Ted has suggested showing the first character of each cell in inverse 
> > video. Since we don't use a console interface, we could show a vertical 
> > bar at the boundaries. But I don't like this as a default: I don't like 
> > having vertical bars around everywhere.
> >    
>
> To me, that doesn't tell too much. How about emulating little cells
> inside, i.e. very faint lines surrounding each separate contained region.

As a view option, great. As the default, I don't like it at all: it must 
be possible to clone one cell into another cell and have it look normal.

I'm ok with using this as the default until we have edit bindings for 
contained text, though (if we have them Really Soon Now ;-) ).

> And I'd definitely label containment as an experimental feature; I hope
> that doesn't bother you.

Hm, to me it is a feature that has been part of the zzstructure specs 
for a Very Long Time now, and I don't agree that containment itself is 
experimental. I also feel that we need containment itself now, because 
we need it for the email client. I do agree that our way of implementing 
it (which includes view options and edit bindings (but not the 
containment structure)) are experimental, and I do agree that there are 
problems with the 'p' keys until we have working editing across cell 
boundaries.

> > I dunno, I'm ok with the 
> > keys being optional for now, but I don't like your way to activate them...
> >    
>
> Oh, that was only a suggestion. Feel free to suggest something better.

Hm, if we had a real command line program to start the client, I'd say

gzz --use-containment-keys

is good enough... maybe for now,

make run CONTAINMENT=on

which would then call Gzz.py as above?

> > Also, there's the point that Ted has said he wants these bindings like 
> > that, even though in the Perl client, too, Ctrl-K (or what it was) 
> > edited only the text in the cell itself, not the contained cells.
> >    
>
> I'm not saying that we shouldn't have them; I'm saying we need to be
> careful about them.

Yep, I agree. (All I was saying is, we *will* have 'p'/'P' in some way 
or another, so we have to solve the ui problems you came up with in some 
other way than, for example, rename 'p' to 'Ctrl-Alt-Meta-P' ;-) )

- Benja