Re: Control::reactivate_and_undo

[Martijn van Beers <martijn earthling net>]

On Wed, Feb 16, 2000 at 08:53:41AM -0800, Chuck Jazdzewski wrote:
> >  > reactivate_and_undo() is certainly only design-mode behavior
> >     It is?  Ok, now I'm confused.  What's design-mode behavior and how
> > is it distinct from run-mode behavior?
> The is best explained by example. Assume the control is a simple OK button.
> In design mode you want to be able to change its location, the caption (in
> this case to OK), make it appear to be the default button, and then add some
> code to do the OK behavior. All that is in design-mode. In run-mode, you
> just want the user to invoke the code by either pressing the button or
> hitting Enter. You would never do undo-able changes to the button.

OK, seems like you're looking at undo solely from a gui builder
point of view. I would think undo would be useful for more than just
a gui builder, and thus would benefit from an interface of its own.
That way, the builder components, an embedded document, and other
things could use the same interface.

I don't think controls want an undo functionality outside of the
gui builder, so including the functionality in the control interface
seems weird to me.

> This seems reasonable, but I feel that there needs to be at least one
> interface that encompases the essense of what is required to be a control,
> one for an embedding, etc. [...]

Could you please explain why?


Martijn



-- 
Martijn van Beers  <martijn@earthling.net>

'Don't worry if it sounds odd. Believe me, you are talking to
someone who has seen a lot of stuff that is odd. And I don't
mean biscuits.' --- Arthur Dent