editor bugs: failed backward search in entire scope

[GPFault 0]

all tested on NDN v2.15.5814 W32 (with ALL NDN settings default) under XP SP1 RU

1.editor:if backward search in entire scope failed

in 2.15.5814 cursor goes to 32767:lastline

in 2.15.4000 cursor may be randomly placed and editor become a litle buggy...

to reproduce:

create empty file

F7

check Backward,Entire Scope

search something non-empty

After dialog "not found" cursor goes there

2.editor: in overwrite mode BackSpace always deletes to next tab pos - is it bug or new feature?

i read in whatsnew smth about unindent in overwrite mode, but not about this...

related:i suppose you know, but it`s too critical: in 2.15.4000(W32):

open empty file in editor

Right(->) , Ins(to overwrite mode), Backspace: editor crashed with 3 keys!(2.15.4000(W32))

3.editor:persistent block mode bugs

A.create 2-line file:

t
text

select second line

position cursor in begining of 2 line

press BS - only tex is selected

 

B.create empty file

type: z, Shift-Home

tab - you see first bug (selection dosen`t move)

BackSpace - you see similar bug

macro cmds from edcom.dnr:

(version from 22-Dec-2005)

mistype: ScreeBottom (also in help)

StartSearch exist in help but in edcom.dnr it is accidentally replaced by ScrollUp

CtrlHome,CtrlEnd exist only in help because in edcom.dnr they already are ScreeBottom and ScreenTop

DelToSOL and DelToEOLN - what about standardization of presence of 'N'?..

[AngelsHolocaust 0]

hi GPF!

 

1. uffa, thanks (also works on non empty files :)

 

2. well, it IS a feature.

i recognized that BACKSP (or TAB) doesn't work differently in overwrite mode compared to the insert mode

it you enabled options backspace unindents NDN will ignore characters (which it should in overwrite mode) and goes to the next tabulator position (or smart tabs, if enabled)

you have to get used to it, BUT it's a consistent behaviour

 

i could not produce the crash, is it gone in 5814? it is in my current version

 

3a. ok!

3b. this happens also in non pers. blocks, ok

 

4. in fact, EOLN is not common, i would use EOL only, so, what about removing the N? :)

 

thanks

Stefan / AH