Le 25/10/2015 15:37, Paul A. Rubin a écrit :
Pavel Sanda <sanda <at> lyx.org> writes:
This would be nice to have, though I am wondering whether such feature doesn't
belong directly to menu, next to 'Show changes in output'. More work, I
know...
I was hoping it would be a menu choice in an upcoming release. Besides
needing someone to do the coding (not me -- I'm severely allergic to C++), I
think it would require a solution that works for all output formats (or at
least all formats that can show changes). That's currently beyond my (very)
limited command of LaTeX, but maybe someone else could pull it off.
Paul
I see three propositions in this message:
1- Having it done natively by LyX instead of using a module.
2- Having it enabled or disabled according to an option in the
preferences/menu.
3- Fixing your LaTeX code so that it works for XeTeX.
1- would be great. Since it's adding some lines to some LaTeX code
already generated by LyX, it should not be too difficult. One has to be
careful of only doing it for the formats where it works, but it should
not be too difficult to do on LyX's side, or at least it is easy to do
in LaTeX with the package iftex (which includes commands \ifPDFTeX,
\ifXeTeX, and \ifLuaTeX).
Although 1- seems easy, the surest way to see it done, and not added on
the top of the very long wish-list, is to try and do it yourself. I wish
I can succeed in encouraging you to do so. In particular, not all of us
are fond of C++; in my case I progressively became so overwhelmed with
bugs and annoyances that it became necessary to step up to help LyX go
in the good direction. Also, as I see it, it should be easy to make such
simple fixes without doing anything too C++-idiosyncratic.
I do not see the rationale for 2-. To me, there are already too many
minuscule options in LyX. Being able to choose whether or not we want
bars in the margin like in the LyX window when showing the changes is
not important IMO. And it becomes much more complicated, because one has
to change the GUI, preferences, translation strings, etc. But even if a
patch implementing 2- was offered if would prefer not to have an
additional option for this and have it automatically (unless I am
missing some point).
3- does not seem urgent to me, since in it does not introduce any
regression as far as XeTeX is concerned. I agree that this would get
more confusing if 2- is implemented and the option has no effect in
XeTeX, but it is one more reason for not doing 2-.
That being said, I can get the module in. Are you satisfied with it and
do you want it?
Guillaume
