Re: empty blocks vs. zero-length runs

Subject: Re: empty blocks vs. zero-length runs
From: Jesper Skov (
Date: Mon Jun 05 2000 - 14:37:21 CDT

>>>>> "Paul" == Paul Rohr <> writes:

Paul> Since you're currently wading through all that code, I'd like to
Paul> check on a suggestion which has been floating around the back of
Paul> my brain for quite a while to see what you think. (Ditto for
Paul> Eric, the original author of much of this code.)

Paul> Could we prevent all this trouble by guaranteeing that *no*
Paul> level of the layout hierarchy is ever totally empty?

Paul> It seems like the main reason we run into trouble is that
Paul> various physical layout units (pages, columns, blocks, lines,
Paul> runs) can sometimes be totally empty. Thus, any attempt to
Paul> hit-test at that level will fail. I forget why we ever
Paul> introduced the concept of zero-width runs, but it feels hackish.


It all sounds right to me. But the smallish hacking I've done haven't
really given me the grand overview - so there could be some nasty
gotchas hiding.

But unless Eric has anything to comment on it, I'd be happy to try and
implement what you have suggested. I'll be sure to post all my
clueless questions and/or observations on the subject as soon as I
have 'em :)


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Jun 05 2000 - 14:37:28 CDT