Re: RFC: api change for insert-text (Re: Bug report for signal "insert-text")

["muppet" <scott asofyet org>]

Torsten Schoenfeld said:
> On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 19:33, muppet wrote:
>
> > the annoying part of that is "why do i have to return these two values if i
> > don't want to modify them?"
>
> Is there any application for the "insert-text" signal that doesn't
> require modifying those values? I can't think of any that wouldn't be
> better done using the "changed" signal.

if you simply don't want some string to be entered at all, you stop the
emission of the signal.  "changed" is a notification that it has already
happened, which can be too late.

and i'm not sure you'd want to change the insert position all that often. 
it's rather disorienting.

-- 
muppet <scott at asofyet dot org>