Better patch for bug 10

Subject: Better patch for bug 10
From: sam th (sam@bur-jud-118-039.rh.uchicago.edu)
Date: Tue Feb 08 2000 - 19:42:49 CST

• sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
• Next message: Paul Rohr: "should we bother making this a POW? (was Re: Hello...)"
• Previous message: Daniel Weber: "Re: should we bother making this a POW? (was Re: Hello...)"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Since my previous fix for bug 10 aroused some hostility, I have here a new
one. This one divided the logic used in selecting a word, and moving to
the next word, so that the goals of these two operations no longer
conflict. While this patch does not address the larger issues of making
selection work like other word procesors, it does fix the bug at hand. I
think this is likely to be important for people.

           
                                     sam th
                                     sytobinh@uchicago.edu
                                        
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE4oMYbt+kM0Mq9M/wRAvG0AJ9LEbnYXd4AcIUPIXxCAGAoP9Hx+gCfd1nM
u0MeEQJLr3AC2ZVHy1JE8SI=
=40k2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• TEXT/PLAIN attachment:

• Next message: Paul Rohr: "should we bother making this a POW? (was Re: Hello...)"
• Previous message: Daniel Weber: "Re: should we bother making this a POW? (was Re: Hello...)"

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Tue Feb 08 2000 - 19:42:12 CST