X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<56D2B0B4.4090100@xs4all.nl>
Date:	Sun, 28 Feb 2016 09:32:52 +0100
From:	"Bert Timmerman (bert DOT timmerman AT xs4all DOT nl) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110429 Fedora/2.0.14-1.fc13 SeaMonkey/2.0.14
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] Re: re-instituting GetXY()
References:	<CAC4O8c89o1=fvhY=hYBSDb9W1wbruhBFR93r2TPzsuT1ChJkCw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <CAC4O8c_eP=Dx8YELmaZ9nvK_3yo97JHRfEYhpi7NXj2dnEBLrg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <201602260114 DOT u1Q1EFRk019336 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAC4O8c9ZxsCOanQCm5tjZJaTFF1YVeRywynEkgJfXcXv=covsA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <201602262010 DOT u1QKA2Hf024379 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAC4O8c898gX9Bqr=o1dt=SiOr7hwVOmHojJTPp-2-cibW0DowQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> <201602272322 DOT u1RNMjrQ001204 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <CAC4O8c-oyC1VtT8j5n=CJOpzaUFbwT1JbPqJh02dAg0g3yLaAw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
In-Reply-To:	<CAC4O8c-oyC1VtT8j5n=CJOpzaUFbwT1JbPqJh02dAg0g3yLaAw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com

Britton Kerin (britton DOT kerin AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 2:22 PM, DJ Delorie<dj AT delorie DOT com>  wrote:
>    
>>      
>>> Seems to work.  So I guess doing things this way the&x and&y args aren't
>>> used for anything, and the rest of the actions in the sequence know to get
>>> the coordinates from a global somewhere?
>>>        
>> Yup.
>>
>>      
>>> It looks like there are only a handful of actions that set need_coord_msg
>>> non-NULL.  Is there any reason to have both mechanisms?  I haven't run into
>>> anything that seems to need multiple clicks.
>>>        
>> Sometimes an action itself needs a point, and provides a reason.  It
>> would fail without one, so it says so.
>>
>> Sometimes you mix many actions together, some of which need points,
>> but the reason for the *mix* differs, so you can change the message
>> the user sees.  For example, the list of actions that converts a
>> selection to an element needs a point for the element's mark, but none
>> of the individual actions involved know that (IIRC the cut() needs a
>> point, but it doesn't know it's being used to convert an element).
>>
>> In these cases, GetXY() lets you "document" a set of actions in a way
>> that's meaningful to the user.
>>      
> Ok thanks.  At first glance it's highly surprising that GetXY() ends up needing
> to declare itself as an action that doesn't require a point, and I suppose
> that's why it's got it's present "".  GetXY() effectively acts only on behalf
> of other actions.  If there's any small renaming or refactor that might make
> all this clearer it might be worth it.  I don't know what it would be though
> so unless you have ideas I'll just comment it in GetXY() and make this change.
>
> Britton
>
>    
Hi,

These may help:

http://git.geda-project.org/pcb/commit/?h=home/bert/doxygen&id=8c138288c086870eea9368d119590d68f82a849f

and

http://git.geda-project.org/pcb/commit/?h=home/bert/doxygen&id=81d21282cb24d32f376791a3f1e79d86a5c70b1e

Kind regards,

Bert Timmerman.

- Raw text -