Actually, I read the code, but didn't know what the changes other than
the width: remove were trying to solve, and I didn't feel like second
guessing... Now I know :-)

Daniel

Eddie Cottongim <cottonsqueak at earthlink.net> wrote:
> The changeset I posted did highlighting correctly. Due to this, and a few
> other things, I'm not convinced that anyone actually tried, or looked at, my
> changeset. The bug report-to-testing ratio is quite high, though I do
> appreciate all the thought and debate that goes into this.
> 
> To spare anyone the pain of reading code, here is what the changeset did.
> There were 4 method changes. One to remove the width: call. One to adjust
> drawOn: to draw the highlight correctly. Two changes to (un)highlight
> methods to get the area invalidations right.  Removing the #width: call
> without other adjustments will change the appearance of highlighting.
> 
> Btw, I notice that Windows does the partial-width highlight style. I prefer
> the full width style that Squeak (usually) uses. Might be preference
> material.
> 
> Bob, thanks for catching the thing with balloon help. I got this halfway
> fixed, but don't have time to finish it yet.
> 
> Eddie
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daniel Vainsencher" <danielv at netvision.net.il>
> To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list"
> <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> Cc: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 8:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [ENH][Refactor] PLMCleanUpStart (v2)
> 
> 
> > Since highlighting is done by the list morph anyway, that can be fixed
> > by changing PLM>>drawOn:. But the ballon help is handle by the item
> > morph, so its harder to cheat there. I guess we're running into a more
> > general issue - who determines the items effective width, the list or
> > the item. This will be more complicated when we have general morphs in
> > there. Either way, if we want the StringMorph case to stay width: 9999,
> > thats trivial too.
> >
> > Daniel
> >
> > Bob Arning <arning at charm.net> wrote:
> > > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003 14:51:17 +0300 Daniel Vainsencher
> <danielv at netvision.net.il> wrote:
> > > >[how wide the StringMorphs should be made]
> > > >This part of the thread is moot. As Eddie said, removing the
> > > >#width: call completely is the correct solution. It is no
> > > >longer needed, and selection just works.
> > >
> > > It may be a matter of personal taste, but limiting the highlighting
> width to that of the characters in the string doesn't seem like an
> improvement. The same shortcoming applies to balloon help on list items.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Bob
> >
> >