lynx-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lynx-dev LYNX: more pleas for the L-page addrs


From: Klaus Weide
Subject: Re: lynx-dev LYNX: more pleas for the L-page addrs
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 20:21:38 -0600 (CST)

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, David Combs wrote:
(quotes reordered)

> > 5) Some parts of the code rely on link numbers being surrounded by exactly
> >    '[' and ']' - especially the fickle code for removing link numbers for
> >    "hidden links" after the fact.  I wouldn't like to have to make that code
> >    more general.
> 
> How does THIS 5) code work?  Does it actually scan for square brackets in the
> text?  Suppose someone has some title or url or whatever within square 
> brackets;
> does that fool lynx?  Clearly, I misunderstand something (as usual).

That doesn't happen at arbitrary times, but only directly after the
"[nnn]" has already been appended to the text structure being built,
i.e. when the "[nnn]" is (supposedly) at the very end of the current
text.  Even that is complicated enough, since the line may have been
broken while the "[nnn]" was being output or spaces inserted, and
because of the way lynx stores the rendered text scanning back is not
a trivial matter.

> RE this part of item 3):
> >    Any attempt to remedy this would
> >    involve either re-rendering the document with the link completely
> >    (an all-around bad idea, especially since we don't yet have a "raw bytes"
> >    cache, so a new network request would be needed), or messing with the
> >    already-rendered text structure (theoretically possible, but a new kind
> >    of hack nobody has tried yet).
> 
> Well, surely a pain.  But if this "you have already been there" stuff
> is so useful, having it on only the L-page is having it pretty far
> away from where you'd want it.

I remind you that the "you have been already there" indication is only
a side effect and is not reliable.

> I sure don't know the data structures in lynx, but
> I would imagine that each url mentioned had ONE
> url-struct, 
... let's call it HTAnchor...

> which contained a ptr to a linked
> list of the occurrences of that url in the page,
> each of those "occurence struct"
... let's call it TextAnchor...

> also having
> its own label string, the one for that occurrence
> (or is it called a "title"?) -- with a backptr to
> that url-struct.
> 
> Also, each occurence struct would have pointers
> to the char-position of the [ and the ].
> 
> The url-struct would have the been-visited bit.

Nice speculation.  Now, if you could just overcome your
aversion against C, you could go and check whether you have
speculated right. :)

Oh, and your speculation is based on a misunderstanding of "title",
see my other mail.

   Klaus

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]