Udo Richter wrote: > Klaus Schmidinger wrote: >>> Udo Richter wrote: >>>> The original patch did not attempt to fix Skip(), it just fixes the >>>> wrong calculation of StartTime(). Skip() could be fixed by this >>>> additional patch: (untested!) >>> >> I'm afraid this might have a nasty side effect. >> Imagine the following scenario: >> >> - a weekly timer that records on Mondays at 20:00 >> - at Monday, 19:00 the user decides to skip today's recording, >> so he presses the red button on the timer >> - some time later he decides to make this timer also record >> on Tuesdays, so he edits the timer and sets the day flag for >> Tuesday by pressing '2' > > I have no problem if Skip() continues to mean 'skip next recording' and > sets day to one day later. With the fixed calculation of StartTime(), > its not a big difference in user experience, and using Skip() to > calculate future timers isn't the main goal here. (and can be done by > either looping Skip() or smart use of Matches(t)) > > However, I would suggest to keep at least one startTime = 0; in Skip(), > so the cached startTime is properly invalidated. Ok, that certainly makes sense. Klaus
