I think I'll start asking my many many questions in here as the discussion might benefit the community. :)
Now, we've discussed this before but I am curious as to whether you're using CB in collaboration with others? Merging folded files that conflict is really painful I think. If the other person is using a regular editor it doesn't matter because he will have simply moved your tags up or down, but if somebody else has inserted a tag and as have you, figureing out what belongs where can be quite difficult.
Now, it seems that CB accepts [cf] tags with text, like:
[cf] xxx:yyy
Hence, I am thinking that it wouldn't break too many things if these were (optionally, if you like) automatically added.
What do you think?
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I think that it is not a good solution. It adds redundancy in the source file, and it makes it harder to read with another editor: the header appearing at the end of a block would add confusion.
I could add an option but first, I prefer to search an alternative solution to the merge/conflict issue in order to avoid too many options in settings and because once an option is added, it is almost impossible to remove it.
A solution could be the ability to open broken files, to edit the source and to see the result in realtime (a side by side view) or almost realtime.
I'm also working on a 'relative indentation' mode where subfolds are indented according to the indentation of their headers:
<!--[of]:Body-->
<BODY>
<!--[of]:A table...-->
<TABLE>
...
</TABLE>
<!--[cf]-->
</BODY>
<!--[cf]-->
(when loaded, <TABLE> starts at column 1)
This feature would also help resolving conflicts on fold directives: matching tags have the same indentation.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Ooops, sourceforge has removed the indentation of my sample :( Here is the correct indentation:
|<!--[of]:Body-->
|<BODY>
| <!--[of]:A table...-->
| <TABLE>
| ...
| </TABLE>
| <!--[cf]-->
|</BODY>
|<!--[cf]-->
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Interesting..
This kind of view would definitely be helpful..
If links were inlined as well (I can see the problems that this would cause though), you could "see" .cpp and .h files as a single unit which would be very cool..
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
There is the multi-frame patch by Mark Ng that can do it but I still doesn't have intergrated it and it
was made for version 1.3, I don't know if it still works.
One of these days I'll implement tiling windows (it is more keyboard friendly than multiple frames).
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hi Marc,
I think I'll start asking my many many questions in here as the discussion might benefit the community. :)
Now, we've discussed this before but I am curious as to whether you're using CB in collaboration with others? Merging folded files that conflict is really painful I think. If the other person is using a regular editor it doesn't matter because he will have simply moved your tags up or down, but if somebody else has inserted a tag and as have you, figureing out what belongs where can be quite difficult.
Now, it seems that CB accepts [cf] tags with text, like:
[cf] xxx:yyy
Hence, I am thinking that it wouldn't break too many things if these were (optionally, if you like) automatically added.
What do you think?
Hi,
I think that it is not a good solution. It adds redundancy in the source file, and it makes it harder to read with another editor: the header appearing at the end of a block would add confusion.
I could add an option but first, I prefer to search an alternative solution to the merge/conflict issue in order to avoid too many options in settings and because once an option is added, it is almost impossible to remove it.
A solution could be the ability to open broken files, to edit the source and to see the result in realtime (a side by side view) or almost realtime.
I'm also working on a 'relative indentation' mode where subfolds are indented according to the indentation of their headers:
<!--[of]:Body-->
<BODY>
<!--[of]:A table...-->
<TABLE>
...
</TABLE>
<!--[cf]-->
</BODY>
<!--[cf]-->
(when loaded, <TABLE> starts at column 1)
This feature would also help resolving conflicts on fold directives: matching tags have the same indentation.
Ooops, sourceforge has removed the indentation of my sample :( Here is the correct indentation:
|<!--[of]:Body-->
|<BODY>
| <!--[of]:A table...-->
| <TABLE>
| ...
| </TABLE>
| <!--[cf]-->
|</BODY>
|<!--[cf]-->
Interesting..
This kind of view would definitely be helpful..
If links were inlined as well (I can see the problems that this would cause though), you could "see" .cpp and .h files as a single unit which would be very cool..
Side-by-side windows would solve this issue.
There is the multi-frame patch by Mark Ng that can do it but I still doesn't have intergrated it and it
was made for version 1.3, I don't know if it still works.
One of these days I'll implement tiling windows (it is more keyboard friendly than multiple frames).