gEDA-dev: glist-dev without screen coordinate caching

[Patrick Bernaud]

Hi Carlos,

Carlos Nieves Ónega writes:
 > [...]
 > The glist-dev branch contains two main changes: the first one (and the
 > older) is to convert the SELECTION into a GList. 
 > Since we all agree this is fine, and some future development depends on
 > that, at least I'd merge these changes asap into HEAD.
 > 

I am ok with the conversion of SELECTION with GList.

 > [...]
 > IIRC (it's almost one month since I don't deal with the glist-dev source code),
 > the undo is only used when moving objects (keeping the old behaviour of gschem), 
 > but not when copying (changed completely to use the complex place
 > list).

Note that, like you, I am (sadly) not working full time on this
project. 

 > [...]
 > Patrick, I feel there is a lack of communication here. This is the first
 > time I hear any technical comment (i.e.: more than "this is not
 > working") about this patch since I started it (long before the transition 
 > from noweb to plain C).

May I remind you that I reported the problem with stretching the lines
and made comments on the SELECTION type. Correct me if I am wrong but
so far I have been the only one to review and post comments on this
code.

When I reported the problem with stretching when moving objects I
looked at how I could help on this particular point and did not
found. I was short on time and it had been put in mid air until the
very beginning of December. That is when I found the undo problem and
its consequences.

Since this time I have been trying to rewrite this part of your branch
to avoid it.

To anyone on this list it looks as if everything was OK until I
reported the problems (I agree that some of them are older than the
branch and therefore not your responsability).

Please understand that if I had not had a working alternative I would
have shut up and let your branch be merged as it is. All in all it
manages to do what we want.

 > [...]
 > P.S.: I tried to explain my feelings politely. If you think these words
 > are rude, it was _not_ my intention, but my lack of (enough) english knowledge.

The same note applies to my above clarifications.

Regards,


Patrick