Re: Patch for a new feature : sozi
- From: Paul Chavent <paul chavent fnac net>
- To: dia-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Patch for a new feature : sozi
- Date: Wed, 09 Nov 2011 20:06:59 +0100
This is the expected behavior.
I want to keep a coherent sequence. So when i change the sequence number of a frame, i want to shift other
frame in order to keep the sequence coherency.
The remaining problem is that i can't update the others frames... So we only see the change when we select
Concerning the problem of accessing the parent layer, i think that i can't do other way. You never needed to
keep global information before (to the sheet lifetime, or to the program lifetime) ?
If i let the user manage the sequence correctness, i don't know what to do in case of errors...
I had an idea for the format of the frame legend displayed in interactive mode : i could put a format string like "# %d :
%s" that could endup with, eg "# 3 : frame title".
Le 11/08/2011 09:13 PM, Hans Breuer a écrit :
At 25.10.2011 22:50, Hans Breuer wrote:
At 25.10.2011 01:27, Paul Chavent wrote:
Here is progression of the sozi integration.
[all the OK stuff deleted]
- better automatic sequence number generation 
OK -> when adding a frame automatically find the last frame number
available, and manage the sequence ordering
Need to check the code to further comment on, but not today ;)
After reading the code I'm wondering if we really should go that road,
i.e. if it is worth the trouble and the extra complexity.
I have never been a fan of the back-pointers from object to owning layer, and from layer to owning diagram.
An object should be able to calculate it's internal state on it's own: It even has to work without being
inserted into a layer. This is crashing with your current implementation,
but I already circumvented this in my local test version.
Releated is the current behaviour when changing the sequence order. I'd say it is at least unusual (if not
unexpected) that changing one's object sequence number makes other objects numbering change as well. But
AFAICT only when they are selected after the first.
Is this intended behaviour or just an unwanted side-effect of the magic involved?
-------- Hans "at" Breuer "dot" Org -----------
Tell me what you need, and I'll tell you how to
get along without it. -- Dilbert
dia-list mailing list
dia-list gnome org
FAQ at http://live.gnome.org/Dia/Faq
Main page at http://live.gnome.org/Dia
] [Thread Prev