Re: [edbrowse-dev] spurious empty buffers from textareas

[Tyler Spivey <tspivey@pcdesk.net>]

I don't really have a preference to the command, but I also vote yes.

What will this do if there's text in that field already? My vote would 
be to say something like <buffer text>, and then let the command just 
put that in. 99% of the time I'm not going to care about whatever 
pre-filled text there is unless I'm filling out the form.

On 1/9/2019 4:18 AM, Karl Dahlke wrote:
> These have annoyed me for quite a while, and come to find they annoy others as well.
> As per our chat discussions, I made a change, but it's a UI change so should be described here.
> (Not everyone is on chat.)
> 
> A fill out form with a textarea use to allocate a buffer for that area at browse time, looking like <buffer 7>
> It now waits to see if you're actually going to use it, since 90% of the time you don't.
> It begins life as <buffer ?>
> 
> An itext (for input text) command  allocates a buffer and changes it to <buffer 7>
> Then you can write text in buffer 7 and submit the form like before.
> It's one more step for something that is rarely done,
> but it prevents a ton of empty buffers from accumulating.
> 
> I have no strong feelings about the actual command name.
> 
> itext (input text)
> ibuf (input buffer)
> iw (input write)
> ita (input textarea)
> 
> Long as it starts with i I'm ok.
> 
> If you change line 760 in decorate.c the old behavior returns.
> 
> I'm not documenting any of this until a majority thinks it's a good idea.
> My vote is yes but others may disagree.
> 
> Karl Dahlke
>