Hi, Hans Breuer <Hans@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > - Intercept every PDB call if a macro recorder instance is running. > (try to guess the call stack depth to avoid recording functions > called by a plug-in) That would mean that all actions go through the PDB. The fact is that no user action goes through the PDB at the moment. Only plug-ins call PDB functions, the core doesn't. We definitely need to change this to make macro recording possible. > Now for my questions : > - are there further huge changes planned for the plug-in/pdb > code (time involved to maintain my patch) ? Yes, definitely. The PDB needs to be completely dumped and redone. It lacks such important features as named parameters and default values. Nathan is already working on a replacement library that is supposed to provide that functionality. We should consider to revamp the PDB soon after the release. > - is the outlined approach mature enough to be at least > considered for acceptance if I have a first working version ? We usually prefer if code is developed in the CVS tree. Most attempts where people tried to prepare a working version in their tree lead to rotting bits and wasted time and effort. It seems like the macro recorder needs some substantial changes to the framework. Once these are done, it should be a piece of cake to implement. That said, I'd suggest you help defining and building the framework needed. Sven
