[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: <patch> Support for large history in Klipper
From:       Esben Mose Hansen <kde () mosehansen ! dk>
Date:       2004-10-26 22:29:31
Message-ID: 200410262229.35274.kde () mosehansen ! dk
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 26 October 2004 21:16, Andrew Stanley-Jones wrote:

> The last time I looked at klipper it gave me a headache.  I wrote a
> small simple program, not what's there now.  I just wanted clipboard
> history.  I'm not the maintainer anymore.

OK :) Besides clipboard history, Klipper seems to be doing
* Actions. Do anybody use this? I always turn them off.
* Clipboard sync. Many dislike the double clipboard concept, and it's a 
natural app as clipboard history can replace the features provided by 
distinct clipboards. So I think that's fine.

> Klipper needs a good deal of work to make it right.  It needs to treat
> selection and the clipboard seperatly in my opinion.  There's nothing
> wrong with copying between the two, but 1 popup isn't right when we have
> effectively 2 clipboards.

Yes, the current setup only works well with "synchronize clipboards". I have 
ideas on the drawing board, but the short history was the biggest itch :)

> I would watch out for memory usage when allowing much longer history.
> You can end up with a lot of data sitting there...

Yes. Actually, I wrote a history that would let clipboard items expire using a 
weighted size+age. It worked well enough, but the code was too complex IMHO 
- --- I needed a type of linked list not supported by QT. 

I also considered dumping QString for a more lightweight object, but decided 
against it, again for simplicity. In the end, the actual data is probably the 
biggest burden. With 2048 strings at perhaps 64bytes each, you'd get 128Kb. 
That is a price I'm willing to pay, and one you don't have to pay if you 
don't want to. 

I'm also worried about memory fragmentation... I would much have preferred a 
deque<> over QT's ptrlists. Again I chose simplicity above a minor gain. 

>
> My 2 cents,

They are appreciated :)

- -- 
regards, Esben

Homepage: http://www.mosehansen.dk
Signature fingerprint at http://www.mosehansen.dk/about
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBfs/Orfnftt13wXIRAgBCAJ9PzG+S9bJUBDd9fxAe8LLIsG/dtwCbBx62
DwO+u+08cSAR3tR6G9nLkis=
=bNS3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
>> Visit http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]