Re: Cross check program--code included

[Harry Binswanger hb@xxxxxxxx]

Carl,

WT--who knew? Wish I had, because twiddling with the ctrl-V frame took a
long time.
 
Yes, the LDKBDs, DE, SV01, and (maybe HIDE . . . UNHIDE) are detritus I
forgot to remove from previous incarnations.
 
Re XP vs. WG, I don't see the need for all that (but you probably have a
good reason). Couldn't I simply begin with an XP and end with a WG, if I
wanted that? But for my use, I have the CM (change mode) on ctrl-o, and
it's second nature for me to use it to get the display mode I want. I
suppose TG is superior to CM, in that it allows for your having been in
WYSIWYG mode, but no one actually uses WYSIWIG, do they? [And is the
correct grammar here "no one . . . does he?--Patricia?]
 
I respect your objectivity in making these frames provide for all
contingencies, and I guess I should check for unsaved edits, but,
subjectively, it doesn't arise in my usage. As to what's necessary to
remove the tags, I'll write a teensy remover routine.
 
It would be very nice to have Robert's program, if there is one. Yes,
redlining does seem to be a better idea, since that can be commanded to be
on or off, plus you have Clear Edit and Put Edit.
 
--Harry
Harry:

Your frame @V loads keyboard files that are specific to your system, so the
frame as written will NOT work for anyone else! However, U2 users can simply
command WT and hit  *twice* to get the same result -- the current and
adjacent windows aligned vertically. Put the "base file" in the current window
and the other file in the alternate window before you issue this command.
As to frame @-, I don't understand the references to func DE -- seems to assume
text is DeFined but I don't see where that occurs. Also, the references to
numerical S/Gs (and, later, HIDE...UNHIDE) seem unnecessary. Also, the frame
seems to assume that the subject files are already in a formatted view. Here, however,
since you're embedding MoDe commands, to ensure that they're precisely placed
it's safer to force eXPanded view to do the work, then toggle Draft or another
formatted view at the end so that the MoDed text displays in color. In other
words, at the top of the frame do this:

XPLeNCODE v2.0
b-gin [UNTITLED]
{<}SV01,{>}{<}IF{<}VA$DT{>}>0&{<}VA$DT{>}<>8{>}{<}SV01,[TG_]{
{062}}[XP_]{<}EI{>};*;[cr|lf]
-nd
XPLeNCODE

and end the frame with «pv01»DO FF .

Finally, here's a more compact way to code frame HB15:

XPLeNCODE v2.0
b-gin [UNTITLED]
{{;5hb15}} Move line under to row 15 [HB rev. CLD][cr|lf]{002
}{<}SU01,{<}SX02,15-{<}VA$CY{>}{>}{<}SV03,[MU_]{>}{<}IF{<}PV0
2{>}>0{>}{<}SV03,[MD_]{>}{<}EI{>}{<}CUa,02{>}{<}PV03{>}{<}LBa
{>}{>};*;[cr|lf][GT_][DX_]{<}GT01{>}[AS_][GT_]{<}GT01{>}[AS_]
{002}[cr|lf][cr|lf]
-nd
XPLeNCODE


Hope this helps.

P.S. I don't like the concept of marking up the two subject files. For one
thing, your schema doesn't inquire whether either file has unSAved edits.
That's crucial, because later, if you ABort the file to get rid of the markup,
you also lose the unSAved edits! Yes, you can remove the MD IB commands with a CHange
command, but that's a pain.

IIRC, Robert has a frame (or maybe a freestanding PM) that uses redlining to do
what you want to do here, but does it non-destructively. I'll try to dig
it out tonight.
--
Carl Distefano
cld@xxxxxxxx

Harry Binswanger
hb@xxxxxxxx