[climacs-devel] adding forward- and backward object to the buffer protocol

[Robert Strandh]

Aleksandar Bakic writes:
 > > Any objections?
 > 
 > I suppose the API would stay the same, 

It depends on what you mean by "the API".  If it includes what is in
base.lisp, then you are right.  If not, the API will indeed change. 

 > you only want to replace (incf (offset
 > mark)) with something more efficient. I do not see what would be bad about
 > that, i.e., I do not have objections.

Good, thanks. 

 > BTW, I added a comment to base.lisp, in connection with do-buffer-region and
 > (setf buffer-object). It seems to me that the reasoning is very similar here.
 > 
 > Dare you use, say, obinseq instead of the 2-3-tree (unless you have already
 > written it), for the buffer of flexichain-based lines?

That's a very good idea.  I haven't written it yet, and it made me
tired to imagine writing another 2-3-tree implementation anyway. 

-- 
Robert Strandh

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenspun's Tenth Rule of Programming: any sufficiently complicated C
or Fortran program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden
slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------