Re: [java-gnome-hackers] sourceview development branch

[Andrew C. <an...@op...>]

On Sun, 2009-05-24 at 11:26 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > Yes, a no-arg constructor would be nice. Will have a look at that.
> 
> I just added that constructor. To do that, I added an additional
> constructor to TextBuffer and made TextTagTable.getDefaultTable()
> public. I hope that's OK.

I have long wished that Java had a "library" visibility between public
and package. Oh well.

So what you did worked, but instead I think we'll keep it out of public
by moving getDefaultTable() from TextTagTable to TextBuffer and making
protected there so SourceBuffer can see it.

I've done this; see 'hackers/andrew/sourceview'.

++

I'm going to play with some strongly typed constants a bit, to see if I
can come up with an idiom that doesn't seem too out of control, but
other than that, this branch is acceptable for merging.

AfC
Sydney