RE: [LINUX5250] Screen bleeding

["Ruel, Marc-Antoine" <maruel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

(mix-up of 2 messages)

> DeÂ: linux5250-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux5250-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] De la part de James Rich
> 
> The other thing I noticed is that as far as I can tell your code correctly
> identifies fields as continuous and whether they are first, middle, or
> last, sets the MDT flag appropriately, and returns their contents
> correctly to the as/400 (i.e. MDT set on the first field only).  What I
> don't see happening is the contents of the fields being changed in a
> continuous way.  Maybe I'm just not looking in the right places, but I
> (...)
> I don't see where you are doing this.  Are you?

No. That should be added. I just forgot about that.

> btw - word wrap is a tougher problem.  I've done a proof of concept
> program that handles it (the very first x5250 release).  We could use my
> proof of concept code and integrate into tn5250.

No problem! I'm sorry, but I don't know what word wrap is. My knowledge of 5250 
is still relatively basic.

> I think the single FFW variable is fine since according to the docs you
> can only have one field format word for each field.  As for the continuous
> flags, my implementation is not complete and I think we should use yours.
> While what I had in mind for continuous fields would work, what you have
> done better follows the 5250 protocol and thus would make more sense to
> some future coder.

Sure. But I can't take the credit for the correctness of the code since I did 
have inspiration from the tn5250j project. I only had to understand the inner 
workings and reproduce it in C. Ohh... C, I still code in C!?! :)

> The only change I would make to your implementation is that it assumes
> continuous fields all occur in order one after the other.  The way I did
> cursor progression allows us to use continuous fields even if they are out
> of order.

Ok, I can't recall but I assume you understand the problem better than me :) 
Anyway, we would have to add the content flow on "middle deletion" to the code. 
Did you implement that? I haven't looked at this.

Marc-Antoine Ruel