Re: [Vimprobable-users] [PATCH 0/2] Vimprobable1 autohide inputbar when empty.

[Hannes S. <ha...@yl...>]

gre...@gm... wrote:
> On Sun May 27 2012 04:40:14 AM CDT, Hannes Sch__ller <ha...@yl...>
> wrote:
> > Greg Lutostanski <gre...@gm...> wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 06, 2012 at 04:01:22PM +0200, Hannes Sch??ller wrote:
> > > > I find it strange that in your patch, you never actually check
> > > > whether the inputbar is empty. Unless I'm misinterpreting
> > > > something, you simply force it to always be empty by setting
> > > > echo_active = false and then hide it.
> > > 
> > > Your right, I don't explicitly check as to whether the inputbar is
> > > empty. Instead I am using the boolean echo_active to check if
> > > something is in the inputbar that should be seen. Basically
> > > whenever echo(* Arg) is used, it is set to show the inputbar and
> > > prevent automatic clearing.
> > 
> > What if some function calls echo()? This has nothing to do with the
> > state of echo_active, but nevertheless, it will populate the bar.
> 
> Well echo_active wasn't ever used in the codebase for vimprobable1
> --except for one if statement, so I changed it so that echo_active
> switches on/off whenever echo() or clear_echo() is used. Patch 1/2
> has all these changes, the second patch builds on top to do the
> hiding of the bar.

Yes, that was exactly my initial point: You're not just hiding the bar
when it is not used, but *you're also changing the way feedback works*
at the same time. I.e. the "forcing the bar to be empty". My feeling is
that these are distinct changes, not one. With your patch, there is no
way to hide the bar automatically, but still get feedback messages from
the browser.

Maybe it is only really useful in this combination, but personally, I'm
not convinced. Since there is grave silence otherwise, it is hard for
me to gauge whether I'm off in my judgement.

Hannes