Where the cursor ends up after delete split

Derek Atkins warlord at MIT.EDU
Sun May 22 00:01:36 EDT 2005

"Edward J. Huff" <ejhuff at huff20may77.us> writes:

> Here is what I think now:  after a delete split, the cursor
> should always end up on the next split after the one which
> was deleted.  Any other behavior is counterintuitive and
> unexpected.  The above minor disaster does not happen if
> the cursor acts as it ought to.
> Unless anyone can tell me why it shouldn't do that, (or that
> it's already fixed in g2 -- I haven't built g2 yet...), I'll 
> file a bug report so it gets on the to-do list.  Probably
> I will also fix it but maybe not immediately.

Sounds reasonable to me.

       Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory
       Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board  (SIPB)
       URL: http://web.mit.edu/warlord/    PP-ASEL-IA     N1NWH
       warlord at MIT.EDU                        PGP key available

More information about the gnucash-devel mailing list