[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]
Re: Re: Re: v6: still no multiple undo?
I understand that thera are many people would like have WRI implement in Mathematica one or more of their favourite features of other programs. After all, we all now have multi-gigaherz processors, gigabytes of RAM etc, and wouldn't it be great if Mathematica could do all the things that all these other programs do? You might even not need them any more. However, this kind of approach has its price and to see this clearly I suggest that, before submitting another request for another "great feature you can't live without", everyone reads this: http://hubpages.com/hub/ _86_Mac_Plus_Vs_07_AMD_DualCore_You_Wont_Believe_Who_Wins and thinks again if this price is really worth paying. Andrzej Kozlowski On 8 Jun 2007, at 18:38, Barthelet, Luc wrote: > > While I strongly support that multiple undo is a feature we need to > see > soon, it will take some real work to get there. > > The editor, and the kernels are linked in an efficient exchange of > messages > and information about what needs to be displayed where and when. > > While implementing multiple undo-redo in a stand alone editor usually > requires only to implement a tokenized undo-redo, in the v6 font > end, it > will require a more complex model. It is a bit like if you were > trying to > implement multiple undo on a wiki site like wikipedia where they are > multiple contributors. > > We probably do not want the kernel to "undo", just the front end. > So one > solution would be to make the kernel and the user to appear as a > single > contributor, and to undo both effects on the front end. So one undo > might > remove an output created by the kernel. > > Even that is challenging, because Dynamics now create a lot of > updates and > you will not want to roll those back. > > Anyway, the front end team is obviously smart enough to find a > solution for > all those things, but it is not going to be easy. > > A cheap thing that I would like to see, is a text buffer of all my > input and > all the code I deleted saved as a log on disk. It might be ugly, > but it > would be VERY USEFUL. > > Cheers, > > Luc > > > On 6/7/07 3:34 AM, "David Bailey" <dave at Remove_Thisdbailey.co.uk> > wrote: > >> David wrote: >>> Will Robertson wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> I am baffled that technical software is released in 2007 with >>>> only a >>>> single undo level. Am I missing something here? Is it because I'm >>>> using a student license? How hard can an undo stack really be in >>>> the >>>> notebook interface? >>>> >>>> I've been irritated a few times in v5.2 from clumsy keypresses >>>> losing >>>> me work that I would expect to be two "undo"s away. Alas not. >>>> Still. >>>> >>>> Will Robertson >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Good point! I've wondered the same thing for a long time. This is >>> the >>> only app I run that doesn't happen multiple levels of undo. I >>> think it's >>> time WRI spent some time on this issue. >>> >> How much time could it possibly take! Once you have a 1-level undo >> working, all you need to do is spill the relevant data into a >> structure >> - possibly on disk - and retrieve it as needed! >> >> David Bailey >> http://www.dbaileyconsultancy.co.uk >> > >