Re: lynx-dev lynx2.8.3dev.17

[Vlad Harchev]

On Wed, 15 Dec 1999, Henry Nelson wrote:

> > I've a handful of configuration/porting issues, but would like to make the
> > next patch a pre-release.  That would incorporate only bug-fixes...
> 
> Any chance of putting a short hold until the Visited Page discussion comes
> to some conclusion?
> 
> > * now check directly in postoptions() whether the loaded document is one 
> > from
> >   which submission of option changes can be accepted, using the new tracking
> >   mechanism.  Only the form-based Options Menu and Visited Links are 
> > allowed. 
> 
> I am "uncomfortable" with starting a trend in proliferating the code with
> calls to postoptions(); someone is going to forget something sometime.  It
> doesn't seem all that hard to hit 'o'.
> 
> I also question even the need to have the "tree style" as a runtime option.
> It seems sort of like a general preference to me, and not something that
> one's going to want to change half a dozen times in one lynx session.  How
> about lynx.cfg?
> 
> Was there a compile-time option to drop it?  Like other EXP_ "features,"
> it ought to have one round off-by-default until the clamoring multitudes
> ask for it.

 As for this particular feature, I suggest adding another lynx.cfg option - 
VISITED_LINKS_MODE, with values named after choices that appear in popup that
appears on dev16 lynxes, plus one more, SELECT. So, if anything but SELECT is
selected, that popup is hidden. The default value for it could be the one that
matches old behaviour (but I like new one). I could add that I like that
popup is placed directly at V.L. page (but placing that popup at Options page
TOO could be useful). Also this popup doesn't really take too much screen
space  - just 2 lines when inactive, and please remember that current link
will always denote current document and most probably will be at the bottom
of that page, so most of the time (if you visited a lot of docs) you won't see
that popup at all.
  And I don't think that adding 'configure' option for this is a good choice
since I'm sure the default will be OFF :). And users could be too
lazy to recompile lynx in order to try that functionality. If Henry still
cares so much about extra kilobyte of the code that feature adds, we can
provide configure switch, but with ON as default (but this will lead to
unnecessary complication of code - new #ifdefs).
 
> __Henry
> 

 Best regards,
  -Vlad