Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 11:06:43AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 17/02/2018 à 17:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : > > Le 07/02/2018 à 11:56, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > I tried a vanilla "git revert" on

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 17/02/2018 à 17:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : Le 07/02/2018 à 11:56, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: I tried a vanilla "git revert" on master and there was a conflict so I did not look further. If you have a patch that

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 15/02/2018 à 16:54, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Le 15 février 2018 16:32:23 GMT+01:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : I can try to prepare that. What character you want me to paste there? I can't take 'f' from esint, there is no 'f' included.

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 07/02/2018 à 11:56, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: I tried a vanilla "git revert" on master and there was a conflict so I did not look further. If you have a patch that reverts it, I could test that. Please, try the attached.

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Pavel Sanda wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Le 15 février 2018 16:32:23 GMT+01:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > > a écrit : > > > > >>I can try to prepare that. What character you want me to paste there? > > >>I can't take 'f' from esint, there is no 'f' included. Pavel >

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 15 février 2018 16:32:23 GMT+01:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes > a écrit : > > >>I can try to prepare that. What character you want me to paste there? > >>I can't take 'f' from esint, there is no 'f' included. Pavel > > > >The integral at position

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 15 février 2018 16:32:23 GMT+01:00, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes a écrit : >>I can try to prepare that. What character you want me to paste there? >>I can't take 'f' from esint, there is no 'f' included. Pavel > >The integral at position 1. And glyph number 4, I think. JMarc

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 15 février 2018 16:23:16 GMT+01:00, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> Le 15/02/2018 ?? 16:13, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >>> So what about copy-paste esint(f) into DejaVuSerif-Italic via >fontforge >>> and check what happens. >>> If there is some metainfo set

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 15/02/2018 ?? 16:13, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >> So what about copy-paste esint(f) into DejaVuSerif-Italic via fontforge >> and check what happens. >> If there is some metainfo set wrong we could use Dejavu as a skeleton >> and copy our symbols there... > > I never

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 15/02/2018 à 16:13, Pavel Sanda a écrit : So what about copy-paste esint(f) into DejaVuSerif-Italic via fontforge and check what happens. If there is some metainfo set wrong we could use Dejavu as a skeleton and copy our symbols there... I never used fontforge to modify a font... JMarc

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 14/02/2018 ?? 17:11, Pavel Sanda a écrit : >> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>> I took a look at the Qt4 and Qt5 code and did not see a difference. It >>> might be that our fonts are malformed. >> I loaded esint10.ttf into fontforge and when I go to Metrics->set >>

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 14/02/2018 à 17:11, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I took a look at the Qt4 and Qt5 code and did not see a difference. It might be that our fonts are malformed. I loaded esint10.ttf into fontforge and when I go to Metrics->set L/RBearings of integral sign (#1) I see the

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 14/02/2018 à 16:50, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I have tried to run ttfdump on the ttf files, and it shows properly negative right bearings for both fonts. At this point, I give up :) Maybe we can try bipartisan attempt on Qt bug tracking system. I recently filled up

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 03:31:24PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/02/2018 à 00:10, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > > Does that seem reasonable to you (for 2.3.0)? > > > > > > Yes, I think so. Also because this regression will put pressure on > > > JMarc for quickly finding a solution

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I took a look at the Qt4 and Qt5 code and did not see a difference. It > might be that our fonts are malformed. I loaded esint10.ttf into fontforge and when I go to Metrics->set L/RBearings of integral sign (#1) I see the value 113.5. I doesn't look as what your log

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 14/02/2018 à 16:50, Pavel Sanda a écrit : Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I have tried to run ttfdump on the ttf files, and it shows properly negative right bearings for both fonts. At this point, I give up :) Maybe we can try bipartisan attempt on Qt bug tracking system. I recently filled up

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > I have tried to run ttfdump on the ttf files, and it shows properly > negative right bearings for both fonts. At this point, I give up :) Maybe we can try bipartisan attempt on Qt bug tracking system. I recently filled up the bug for Qt5 not rendering characters for

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 13/02/2018 à 00:10, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : Does that seem reasonable to you (for 2.3.0)? Yes, I think so. Also because this regression will put pressure on JMarc for quickly finding a solution ;) Thanks, sounds good. OK, I know nobody cares, but it seems that the issue is not really

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 09:09:22AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 13/02/2018 à 00:10, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > Yes, I think so. Also because this regression will put pressure on > > > JMarc for quickly finding a solution ;) > > > > Thanks, sounds good. > > Are you two plotting

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 13/02/2018 à 00:10, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : Yes, I think so. Also because this regression will put pressure on JMarc for quickly finding a solution ;) Thanks, sounds good. Are you two plotting against me? %-] JMarc

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 06:53:36PM +, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:35:46AM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 04:28:49AM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > > Whatever Enrico and JMarc decide regarding this for 2.3.0 is fine for > > > me. > >

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 11:35:46AM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 04:28:49AM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > Whatever Enrico and JMarc decide regarding this for 2.3.0 is fine for > > me. > > Enrico, JMarc proposed [1] the following: > > I propose to keep the

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 12/02/2018 à 17:35, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 04:28:49AM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: Whatever Enrico and JMarc decide regarding this for 2.3.0 is fine for me. Enrico, JMarc proposed [1] the following: I propose to keep the faulty superscript for now and take

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Sat, Feb 10, 2018 at 04:28:49AM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > Whatever Enrico and JMarc decide regarding this for 2.3.0 is fine for > me. Enrico, JMarc proposed [1] the following: I propose to keep the faulty superscript for now and take some time to determine a satisfactory solution.

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 06:25:46AM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 10:56:58AM +, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:01:02AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > > >

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 10:56:58AM +, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:01:02AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > Enrico, for reference this is the commit where we use > > > QFontMetrics::width

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 12:06:13PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 07/02/2018 à 11:56, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:01:02AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > > > > > Enrico, for

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 07/02/2018 à 11:56, Enrico Forestieri a écrit : On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:01:02AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: Enrico, for reference this is the commit where we use QFontMetrics::width in some cases instead of the

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:19:47PM -0500, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 10:01:02AM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > > Enrico, for reference this is the commit where we use > > QFontMetrics::width in some cases instead of the QTextLayout thing. > > > > I tried to revert

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 01/02/2018 à 06:20, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:41:58PM +, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: For the rest, it is probably the complete rewrite of math spacing... But a bisect may prove useful. Bisect leads to 4a935ed7. Are you sure? Enrico, for reference this is

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

Le 31/01/2018 à 23:26, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : There seems to have been two changes, compared to 2.2.x, regarding the LyX display of the integral sign and its limits. In 2_2016-12-04.png, the upper limit is now vertically aligned with the bottom limit. In current 2.3.x, the limits are moved to

Re: integral upper limit adjacent to integral sign

On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 10:26:31PM +, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > There seems to have been two changes, compared to 2.2.x, regarding the > LyX display of the integral sign and its limits. In 2_2016-12-04.png, > the upper limit is now vertically aligned with the bottom limit. In > current 2.3.x,