Do you think we could include this into the Paste command in
mainwindow.cpp? Right now the code is simply:
} else if ( mimeData->hasText() ) {
pasteFormat = conv.FindFormat( “xyz” );
text = mimeData->text().toAscii();
}
But couldn’t we add some code here to guess the type of coordinates
from the text? This way, we could fix a bug – paste only works on
“true” XYZ coordinates with an atomic symbol in the first column. (I
imagine this confuses many users.) I think your parseText method would
be perfect.
No new extension needed. No new strings needed. 
Right now, “Copy” in mainWindow adds the XYZ molecule format to the
text buffer. Do you think this works OK?
What about coordinates in Bohrs? How to insert them?
Extension is needed anyway to display coordinates in different formats. Many people don’t use input file generators, and not all QC package in the world will be supported
If you don’t like my editor (but I think it better fits the name “editor” than previous), old table based version can be preserved
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Разговорчивая почта находится здесь: http://mail.yandex.ru/promo/new/online
-------- Пересылаемое сообщение --------
04.11.09, 21:29, “Konstantin Tokarev” annulen@yandex.ru:
On Linux, this might be limited to new Python scripts, but on
Mac and Windows, others could contribute binaries.
For example, Q-Chem has a “QUI” extension, which is currently outside
the source tree.
Is it a problem to create archives with dynamic libraries, containing additional plugins? They should run on any distribution, where Avogadro is installed, no need to create specific packages for each
P.S. I’ve meant Linux distributions
P.P.S. Could you set up mailing list to automatically fill reply address with “avogadro-devel@lists.sourceforge.net”?
–
Regards,
Konstantin
-------- Завершение пересылаемого сообщения --------
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Мобильная почта находится здесь: http://mail.yandex.ru/promo/new/mobile
On Nov 5, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
If you don’t like my editor (but I think it better fits the name
“editor” than previous), old table based version can be preserved
Look, I personally like your editor. I incorporated it into my 1.0
release branch, which is exactly what sparked this long set of e-mails.
I’m just thinking that we can get some of the functionality (but not
all) into 1.0.1 by adding code to mainwindow.cpp. Does that sound like
a good idea for now?
Best regards,
-Geoff
On Nov 5, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
If you don’t like my editor (but I think it better fits the name
“editor” than previous), old table based version can be preserved
Look, I personally like your editor. I incorporated it into my 1.0
release branch, which is exactly what sparked this long set of e-mails.
I’m just thinking that we can get some of the functionality (but not
all) into 1.0.1 by adding code to mainwindow.cpp. Does that sound like
a good idea for now?
It seems to be good idea. But I think that testing is required not only for extension (GUI works good), but also for recognition algorithm. I’ve written it from scratch especially for this extension and haven’t tested it outside Avogadro, so it may contain bugs
There is another advantage of extension: it supports paste from X11 selection buffer, it’s very convenient because requires less actions to copy fragment of file.
I really don’t understand why are you so worried about strings, because: 1) it doesn’t introduce many strings ; 2) some of strings are copies of existing ones, so they are already translated; 3)this functionality isn’t critical for schoolchildren, others likely know English enough to understand it.
–
Regards,
Konstantin
Look, I personally like your editor. I incorporated it into my 1.0
release branch, which is exactly what sparked this long set of e-mails.
I’m just thinking that we can get some of the functionality (but not
all) into 1.0.1 by adding code to mainwindow.cpp. Does that sound like
a good idea for now?
Anyway, you are free to use my code as you wish. Recognition engine is separate function parseText, it could be rewritten to use QClipboard instead of QTextEdit, or even moved into OpenBabel if you found it reasonable
Geoffrey Hutchison wrote:
On Nov 5, 2009, at 1:27 PM, Konstantin Tokarev wrote:
If you don’t like my editor (but I think it better fits the name
“editor” than previous), old table based version can be preserved
Look, I personally like your editor. I incorporated it into my 1.0
release branch, which is exactly what sparked this long set of e-mails.
I’m just thinking that we can get some of the functionality (but not
all) into 1.0.1 by adding code to mainwindow.cpp. Does that sound like
a good idea for now?
Sorry about the lack of replies - real life can get pretty hectic at
times. I really like Konstantin’s new Cartesian editor too, but for
months we had talked about switching to a stable release policy and I
thought it would be a good thing to stick to what was proposed.
Tim merged it first, then I unmerged it, then you remerged it. I
honestly think it would be awesome to get into a 1.1/1.2 release. If
this is going to be a real sticking point that causes tension then bear
in mind this is a community project and I was not for a second trying to
dictate rules to contributors (more set up sane policies).
Just my 2c worth…
Marcus