Re: [gtkmm] Gtkmm-forge digest, Vol 1 #187 - 15 msgs

[MHL Schulze t-online de (Martin Schulze)]

Am 09.08.2002 21:30 schrieb(en) Carl Nygard:
> On Fri, 2002-08-09 at 15:01, gtkmm-forge-request lists sourceforge net
> wrote:
>
> > Changed by murrayc usa net 
> >
> > --- shadow/90148	Thu Aug  8 16:01:40 2002
> > +++ shadow/90148.tmp.1203	Fri Aug  9 02:53:54 2002
> > @@ -72,6 +72,17 @@
> >  iterator&, const iterator&)'! Shouldn't we just get rid of it?
> >  The same goes for delete_interactive_text() but here we have an
> >  additional problem: shall we really discard the boolean return value
> >  (which shows whether text was actually deleted)? Is there some kind of
> >  'invalid' or 'eof' iterator that we could return in the case that no
> >  text was deleted?
> > +
> > +------- Additional Comments From murrayc usa net  2002-08-09 02:53
> -------
> > +Yes, if both the start and end would be equal after the method has
> > +finished then there is no need to return both as well as the return
> > +iterator.
> > +
> > +Maybe you could use end() to show that the deletion has not happened.
> > +I don't think that end() would ever be the real "location where text
> > +was deleted." That's what find() would use to show that something was
> > +not found. Or maybe you could add an overload that takes a bool&
> > +parameter.
> >
>
> If one calls delete_text(myIter, end()), shouldn't this work fine, and
> also return end() as the iterator?  In this case it would signify proper
> deletion of text from myIter to the end of the buffer.

Can anyone acknowledge this? In this case we'd have to include a bool& in
the parameter list of delete_interactive_text().

> BTW, in which case would delete_text() fail?

Never, but delete_interactive_text() may result in do deletion if there is
no text marked as "interactive" to delete in the range of the iterators.

> I almost reopened the bug, but I'll leave that to y'all to decide.

Reopen? I haven't seen it being closed!

Regards,

  Martin