-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 362
Removed dependencies in certain document-related classes #2073
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
Lehonti
wants to merge
12
commits into
PintaProject:master
Choose a base branch
from
Lehonti:improvement1
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
12 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c135bfb
Removed `ToolManager` dependency from `DocumentWorkspace`
Lehonti ff6d6be
Removed dependency of `EditActions` in `DocumentHistory`
Lehonti 0f3ee48
Merge branch 'master' into improvement1
Lehonti 53b43bc
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti 5d43877
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti 33331b7
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti 4a277a7
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti 4a73d6f
Merged from `master`
Lehonti 72ca35b
Deleted unnecessary code
Lehonti fdf08ec
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti 500f60e
Removed unused (?) `tools` parameter
Lehonti 594658d
Merge branch 'PintaProject:master' into improvement1
Lehonti File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think the future fix here would be to avoid the dependency entirely - if the EditActions instead listened for history events (similar to the history pad) then it could update the disabled state of the undo/redo actions without needing the Document to be aware of this
If that seems easy to get working, then maybe we just do that instead of introducing and then removing these parameters? Otherwise I'm okay with the changes as an intermediate step
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, that could very well be the case, and sorry if the refactoring seems a bit all over the place sometimes, but sometimes things that seem simple, like removing a dependency, end up touching a lot of files, and I have to 'slice' the planned changes to keep the difficulty of the review reasonable (like here...I planned to remove all dependencies from
Documentbut I couldn't even get all of them out ofDocumentWorkspace). In this case, Visual Studio reports thatPushNewItemhas 54 references. I would rather keep the refactoring you are suggesting for a future pull request, and frankly (at a first glance, looking at the call sites) I think it's quite a few intermediate steps away.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thinking about this more, I am a bit concerned with this intermediate step because it changes a commonly-used API for add-ins (for example, the PintaDemoExtension add-in has a BaseTool subclass which creates history items)
So if we don't end up being able to remove this new parameter before the next release, we'll have some unnecessary churn on bumping the add-in API version multiple times
Just to expand more on my idea from the previous comment: EditAcitons already subscribes to the "active document changed" event to update the state of the undo / redo buttons:
Pinta/Pinta.Core/Actions/EditActions.cs
Line 617 in 5cbe79c
So if this went a bit further and also listened for changes to the document's history stack (like the history panel does:
Pinta/Pinta.Gui.Widgets/Widgets/History/HistoryListView.cs
Line 98 in 5cbe79c
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@cameronwhite I understand that concern and that you want to avoid breaking the API. Just for information, I am going through a very busy period, and I don't expect to be able to look into this (which is not just about the code changes, but also troubleshooting my local dev setup) until around the ~15th of May. There is a slim chance that I am able to take a look in the next four days, but even then it would be tough. Or if you wish you can merge this and take care of the remaining part.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No problem! I might look at making the changes I suggested if I find some time