Georg Baum wrote:
Am Donnerstag, 5. April 2007 14:12 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
http://www.lyx.org/trac/file/lyx-devel/trunk/src/frontends/qt4/QDelimiterDialog.C?rev=17731
==============================================================================
--- lyx-devel/trunk/src/frontends/qt4/QDelimiterDialog.C (original)
+++ lyx-devel/trunk/src/frontends/qt4/QDelimiterDialog.C Thu Apr 5
14:12:07 2007
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
namespace {
-char const * delim[] = {
+string const delim[] = {
"(", ")", "{", "}", "[", "]",
"lceil", "rceil", "lfloor", "rfloor", "langle", "rangle",
"uparrow", "Uparrow", "downarrow", "Downarrow",
@@ -96,39 +96,41 @@
Why this change? The standard idiom in LyX for tables like this is
Standard by which standard? :-)
More seriously because I do this test later in the code:
// The last element is the empty one.
for (size_t i = 0; !delim[i].empty(); ++i) {
char const * const bla[] = { "a", "b", "c", 0};
And with the "" version the test would have been more complicated. With
the 0 version, it's mostly the same:
for (size_t i = 0; !delim[i]; ++i) {
But then I prefer explicit rather than implicit.
(or "" instead of the 0). These two variants should be unified actually,
you should not introduce a third one.
I reckon that we should unify everything to my standard ;-). I also
reckon this is not very important.
Abdel.
