Mark, This patch, like the first one you submitted, is linewrapped (meaning it won't apply cleanly). I'd suggest just attaching the patch to your e-mail, so you don't have to worry about these things.
Also, it's always nice to have a conformance test for things like this. Perhaps show that it's the correct behaviour for both EM_EXSETSEL and EM_SETSEL? If you've got any questions on writing one (or just want me to do it for you), just send me an e-mail.
Thanks for contributing, --Matt
On 9/2/06, Mark Lu excelblue@gmail.com wrote:
ChangeLog:
- Corrects the behavior of ME_SetSelection when selecting from -1 to -1
dlls/riched20/caret.c | 8 ++++++++ 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/dlls/riched20/caret.c b/dlls/riched20/caret.c index bdab179..06f021c 100644 --- a/dlls/riched20/caret.c +++ b/dlls/riched20/caret.c @@ -90,6 +90,14 @@ void ME_SetSelection(ME_TextEditor *edit ME_ClearTempStyle(editor); return; }
- if (from == -1 && to == -1) /*-1,-1 means put the selection at the
end of the text */
- {
- editor->pCursors[1].pRun = editor->pCursors[0].pRun =
ME_FindItemBack(editor->pBuffer->pLast, diRun);
- editor->pCursors[1].nOffset = editor->pCursors[0].nOffset = 0;
- ME_InvalidateSelection(editor);
- ME_ClearTempStyle(editor);
- return;
- } if (from == -1) { editor->pCursors[1] = editor->pCursors[0];
-- 1.4.1.1
-
Matt Finnicum