X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID: <20120713192118.3132.qmail@stuge.se>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 21:21:18 +0200
From: Peter Stuge <peter AT stuge DOT se>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Question/advise/suggestion on gschem 'undo'
Mail-Followup-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References: <20120713122112 DOT 3247247ee710b39349b6bc74 AT jcoppens DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120713122112.3247247ee710b39349b6bc74@jcoppens.com>
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

John Coppens wrote:
> To my surprise the number of levels of undo was very limited.
..
> (undo-levels 10)
..
> Are the resources necessary for undo levels so large?

I would also like to know this.


> Would it be a problem to have, say, 100 or even 500 undo levels?

Make that 50000, or simply infinite in a linked list.

How are actions stored in memory?


//Peter