Hi Tim, thanks for working on the keybinding feature! On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 08:17:13PM +0000, corvid wrote:
Wow that was quick!
- I personally am open to the idea of changing the dillorc format for existing options, but we'll see what the consensus is.
The proposed format looks like the muttrc format. I would not change dillorc to yet another arbitrary format, but if the muttrc style is commonly used - why not. How does vimrc compare to that btw? Would it be possible to make it backward compatible by interpreting [_a-Z0-9]+\s?= the same as if there was a "set " in front?
- I haven't looked at this in any detail yet -- this is just my paging-through-the-patch response -- but I notice a_Nav_push_forced in there. Patches should be kept separate. The smaller they are, the better for review.
- Lines should not be longer than 79 chars.
- I'm sure that Jorge isn't going to want exception handling.
I'm definately against adding exceptions. If we would start a new project, we could discuss pros and cons of using exceptions - I would probabely still vote against using them in that case... But as all current dillo code and also fltk does not use exceptions it would get a real mess if parts of new code would start to use exceptions for error handling while other code is using return values. Cheers, Johannes
I'll add something about that last point to the website, since it's not mentioned currently.
PS Are you sure that fltk doesn't allow modifiers to be combined? Grepping through fltk/test, it looks like they're combining them in menubar.cxx.
_______________________________________________ Dillo-dev mailing list Dillo-dev@dillo.org http://lists.auriga.wearlab.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev