On Tue, Nov 27, 2001 at 01:28:09PM -0800, Waldo Bastian wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 November 2001 10:17 am, Mickael Marchand wrote:
> > why not, we could do much more thing (KTextEditor), question is where ?
> > do we keep old KEdit ? (for compat)
> > or simply moving KEdit somewhere else ?
> >
> > actually, i don't know where we could 'logically' put it,
> > there is no really good place for widgets using
> > interface,kpart,... in kdelibs. I guess we could have the same problem
> > for other widgets later
> 
> I would leave KEdit/keditcl as is and create a new directory libktextedit that 
> implements a edit-widget that dynamically loads the user's preferred 
> KTextEditor part (that's basically a single factory method) and a KSimpleEdit 
> that implements a KTextEditor part based on QTextEdit (you could start with a 
> copy of keditcl for that) 
looks like a good idea, it should solve most of our problems

> I guess this factory method is simple enough to be added to libkpart. So 
> libktextedit would only contain KSimpleEdit which builds into something like 
> libksimpleedit, the default part for this factory method.
i don't really know how to do that function yet, i'll investigate to understand.

> (If I recall corrrectly, that's basically what you had in mind in the first 
> place, but couldn't do because KEdit had to remain source compatible.)
yes that was our first problem, switching to QTextEdit will break
compatibility whatever we do

> We can then mark KEdit/keditcl as obsolete and schedule it's removal for KDE 4 
> or whenever Qt decides to drop QMultiLineEdit completely.
i fully agree
developers should be adviced to switch their KEdit to the KTextEditor
then we will have a common text editor interface everywhere :)

Cheers
Mik

-- 
Mickael Marchand
Elève-ingénieur / Engineer student
Ecole des Mines de Douai - France
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<