Hi,
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be possible to apply a small (7 lines) change from scintilla r3465, which speeds up the rectangular selection about 20 times? It's perfectly compatible with our revision.
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:11:34 +0200, Dimitar wrote:
Hi,
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany - ... - plugins - scintilla - gtk - include - lexers - lexlib - src - src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
possible to apply a small (7 lines) change from scintilla r3465, which speeds up the rectangular selection about 20 times? It's perfectly compatible with our revision.
Depends on we update Scintilla soon :).
Regards, Enrico
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:11:34 +0200, Dimitar wrote:
Hi,
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany
- ...
- plugins
- scintilla
- gtk
- include
- lexers
- lexlib
- src
- src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I'd like to have it inside a branch so we could test it for maybe a week or two and then merging it to trunk.
Cheers, Frank -- http://frank.uvena.de/en/
Am 22.11.2010 01:22, schrieb Frank Lanitz:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 16:11:34 +0200, Dimitar wrote:
Hi,
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany
- ...
- plugins
- scintilla
- gtk
- include
- lexers
- lexlib
- src
- src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I'd like to have it inside a branch so we could test it for maybe a week or two and then merging it to trunk.
But direct putting it into trunk would be also fine with me. In worst case we still using a VCS ;)
Cheers, Frank
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no i18n string changes to add we could start the string freeze in a few days maybe?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany
- ...
- plugins
- scintilla
- gtk
- include
- lexers
- lexlib
- src
- src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
possible to apply a small (7 lines) change from scintilla r3465, which speeds up the rectangular selection about 20 times? It's perfectly compatible with our revision.
Depends on we update Scintilla soon :).
I would prefer not to include this in the 0.20 release, just in case it introduced bugs. I haven't noticed rectangular selection speed being an issue personally.
Nick
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no i18n string changes to add we could start the string freeze in a few days maybe?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany
- ...
- plugins
- scintilla
- gtk
- include
- lexers
- lexlib
- src
- src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
possible to apply a small (7 lines) change from scintilla r3465, which speeds up the rectangular selection about 20 times? It's perfectly compatible with our revision.
Depends on we update Scintilla soon :).
I would prefer not to include this in the 0.20 release, just in case it introduced bugs. I haven't noticed rectangular selection speed being an issue personally.
Nick
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 13:03:46 +0000 Nick Treleaven nick.treleaven@btinternet.com wrote:
possible to apply a small (7 lines) change from scintilla r3465, which speeds up the rectangular selection about 20 times? It's perfectly compatible with our revision.
Depends on we update Scintilla soon :).
I would prefer not to include this in the 0.20 release, just in case it introduced bugs. I haven't noticed rectangular selection speed being an issue personally.
That's for large rectangle selections. With 20 000 lines, any selection key takes 10 seconds. With r3465, the delay goes down to < 0.4 seconds.
I'm 99.9% sure the patch doesn't introduce bugs, but since 0.20 is near, your point is valid...
Am Montag, den 22.11.2010, 13:03 +0000 schrieb Nick Treleaven:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no i18n string changes to add we could start the string freeze in a few days maybe?
I just updated Scintilla in my working copy, adopted the new layout:
geany
- ...
- plugins
- scintilla
- gtk
- include
- lexers
- lexlib
- src
- src
and adjusted the Waf based build system for the change. I didn't test it much so far but it seems fine.
What next? Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
I tend to suggest this right the "inverse way", create a stable branch to work towards the 0.20 release and continue the "unstable" work in trunk...
Regards, Dominic
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:03:53 +0100, Dominic wrote:
Am Montag, den 22.11.2010, 13:03 +0000 schrieb Nick Treleaven:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no
Cool. I'll try to get some of the remaining Windows sorted soon.
Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
I agree. I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
I tend to suggest this right the "inverse way", create a stable branch to work towards the 0.20 release and continue the "unstable" work in trunk...
True. But we did it with the unstable branch in the past and it doesn't hurt. Not really a pro unstable branch argument but still a convenient side effect: using trunk for creating the Windows binaries is easier than cheching out a new branch :).
Regards, Enrico
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:33:55 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:03:53 +0100, Dominic wrote:
Am Montag, den 22.11.2010, 13:03 +0000 schrieb Nick Treleaven:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no
Cool. I'll try to get some of the remaining Windows sorted soon.
Did you mean Windows bugs? While I can't really test on Windows ATM it's possible I may be able to help fix them. Which ones are there?
Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
I agree. I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
Great.
I tend to suggest this right the "inverse way", create a stable branch to work towards the 0.20 release and continue the "unstable" work in trunk...
True. But we did it with the unstable branch in the past and it doesn't hurt. Not really a pro unstable branch argument but still a convenient side effect: using trunk for creating the Windows binaries is easier than cheching out a new branch :).
Although the stable branch pattern may be better, we're used to things this way and some translators commit to trunk also. Probably we should stay with the existing pattern for now but could perhaps change in the future with plenty of notice.
One argument in favour of stable trunk is that more people test the release (it's possible unstable changes hide release bugs).
Nick
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 12:25:42 +0000, Nick wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:33:55 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 22:03:53 +0100, Dominic wrote:
Am Montag, den 22.11.2010, 13:03 +0000 schrieb Nick Treleaven:
On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 18:29:36 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Do we plan to update scintilla anytime soon? If not, would it be
Nick? Any release plans soon?
Yes, I think we could make the 0.20 release soon. If there are no
Cool. I'll try to get some of the remaining Windows sorted soon.
Did you mean Windows bugs? While I can't really test on Windows ATM it's possible I may be able to help fix them. Which ones are there?
In the bug tracker are few open bugs, most important (due to the many reports and affected users) is the one with the window position on restore. Still not sure what's causing this. And another one regarding failing to open files in a running instance from the Windows Explorer. This happens when the filename is passed as UTF-16 or UTF-32 (I guess it's UTF-16) and so contains NULL-bytes. I hope we can fix this with some Windows API but I didn't look into this deep enough yet.
Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
I agree. I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
Great.
And luckily, nobody except Frank noticed I created the branch in tags/ directory instead of branches/ :). Thanks Frank for fixing it.
Regards, Enrico
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 20:09:42 +0100, Enrico wrote:
Either we push into trunk and see how it works or in case we are close to a release, I'd push it into a branch for the curious people.
I think it would be best to put it in an 'unstable' branch. Last time we updated Scintilla just before the 0.19 release it introduced scrolling bugs.
I agree. I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
Soon = now().
I committed the new Scintilla version into the unstable branch. I hope I did it right. The scintilla_changes.patch still needs to be updated, will do this sometime later, though there were no other changes I did to the sources, only removed unused lexers.
There might be more work necessary like updating lexer constants like those for strings and comments in src/editor.c.
Regards, Enrico
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 00:47:22 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
Soon = now().
I committed the new Scintilla version into the unstable branch. I hope I did it right. The scintilla_changes.patch still needs to be updated, will do this sometime later, though there were no other changes I did to the sources, only removed unused lexers.
Great. Looks like quite a big change (the directory structure changes).
There might be more work necessary like updating lexer constants like those for strings and comments in src/editor.c.
BTW we moved the is_{comment,string,code}_style functions to highlighting.c, and they're now in the plugin API. I thought it was good to have most lexer style constant usage in the same source file.
Nick
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 16:59:06 +0000, Nick wrote:
On Thu, 25 Nov 2010 00:47:22 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
I just created the branch and will commit the updated Scintilla copy soon.
Soon = now().
I committed the new Scintilla version into the unstable branch. I hope I did it right. The scintilla_changes.patch still needs to be updated, will do this sometime later, though there were no other changes I did to the sources, only removed unused lexers.
Great. Looks like quite a big change (the directory structure changes).
Probably, although the big changes were in Scintilla. This time I just adopted the original directory structure from the Scintilla project. In the past, we merged the src and gtk folders into scintilla. For the autotools based build system, I did it the easy way and used one Makefile in scintilla/ which builds all source files of the subdirectories instead of walking through the subdirectories. This might be not the autotools way but as I'm not that familiar with it, it was easier for me. If I got it right, one had to build single (static) libraries for each subdirectory and link them together afterwards. If anyone wants to change this, feel free.
There might be more work necessary like updating lexer constants like those for strings and comments in src/editor.c.
BTW we moved the is_{comment,string,code}_style functions to highlighting.c, and they're now in the plugin API. I thought it was
D'oh. I'm not up2date with the code anymore. Shame on me.
Regards, Enrico
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 14:04:37 +0100 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
I committed the new Scintilla version into the unstable branch. I hope I did it right. The scintilla_changes.patch still needs to be updated, will do this sometime later, though there were no other changes I did to the sources, only removed unused lexers.
Great. Looks like quite a big change (the directory structure changes).
Probably, although the big changes were in Scintilla. This time I just adopted the original directory structure from the Scintilla project. In the past, we merged the src and gtk folders into scintilla.
It's better the new way I think :)
For the autotools based build system, I did it the easy way and used one Makefile in scintilla/ which builds all source files of the subdirectories instead of walking through the subdirectories. This might be not the autotools way but as I'm not that familiar with it, it was easier for me.
Sounds Ok.
There might be more work necessary like updating lexer constants like those for strings and comments in src/editor.c.
BTW we moved the is_{comment,string,code}_style functions to highlighting.c, and they're now in the plugin API. I thought it was
D'oh. I'm not up2date with the code anymore. Shame on me.
No, it was a recent change anyway.
Nick