lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev Re: [dev16] patch for an A-page (was: Re: L-page: set/clear


From: Klaus Weide
Subject: Re: lynx-dev Re: [dev16] patch for an A-page (was: Re: L-page: set/clear)
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 20:44:29 -0600 (CST)

On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, Kim DeVaughn wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 1999, Klaus Weide (address@hidden) said:
> |
> | Does ADDRLIST from a LIST page, or LIST from an ADDRLIST page, work?
> | Should it?
> 
> They do.
> 
> Seems like it should to me.

I thought so, too.

> | If it does, what does "A", "l", follow several links until ADDRLIST
> | page not cached any more, then PREV_DOC, do?  (You could set -cache
> | to a low number for testing.)
> 
> Returns to the original document (following a reload, I believe), after
> the A-page was bypassed as "unable to access document".
> 
> What is the concern?

That, after you have gone from the A-page to the l-page, the A-page is
gone.  Well at least the disk file is gone.

This is different than it would be if the functions were completely
independent - one wouldn't eat the other's temp file.

> | (Basically I am wondering about those two functions using the same
> | tempfile, or different files kept in the same tempfile / list_filename
> | variable.)
> 
> Different temp files.  Don't see any problems with the variable.

LYlist_temp_url(), which returns just the list_filename set by the
last invocation of showlist(), is used in mainloop() to determine
whether we are in "the" legitimate LIST page.  mainloop() also sets
the lynxlistfile variable, which is checked in getfile() for more or
less the same purpose.  That won't work reliably any more (assuming it
did before...) if both kinds of lists are in memory and can be
returned to.


> About the only "anomaly" I see is that if one repetitively does something
> like A/l/A/l/A/l/A/l ...  all those pages are "stacked up", and then if
> you do a PREV_DOC, you get an "unable to access doc" alert for each page,
> as they unstack (if you've exceeded the cache number, I suppose).
> 
> Or, if you don't back out of them, but continue going elsewhere, they
> end up in the history page (though not the visited page).

That's as expected.  (Or why should one expect anything else?)


   Klaus

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]