On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 6:22 PM, Scott Kostyshak <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 3:50 AM, Liviu Andronic <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Scott Kostyshak <[email protected]> wrote: >>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 4:24 PM, Enrico Forestieri <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> My vote is for a warning and an output produced in any case. >>>> If latex produces an output, that output has to be shown, IMO. >>>> Having the possibility of looking at the output may be of great >>>> help to pinpoint problems. >>> >>> Interesting idea. If we do this, we should do it for all errors. With >>> >> I would second this. Actually, it seems to me that this is what LyX >> has been doing for quite some time, > >> as somewhat often I get errors but >> a PDF does output (sometimes with useful clues on what really went >> wrong, and pointers on how to fix it). > > LaTeX errors? Strange, for me if my document has LaTeX errors and LyX > catches them by parsing the log, I do not get a PDF. I get the "LaTeX > Errors" dialog. You get the PDF and the "LaTeX Errors" dialog? Can you > send an example .lyx file that does this for you? > No, nothing handy. From memory, the exact use case is that I have a document that compiles and I have a PDF displayed. Then I modify the document, introduce something that will generate an error (perhaps on 2nd pass), and compile from LyX: at one point the document compilation will result in error, but the PDF file shall be reloaded from disk in the PDF viewer (i.e. the PDF will appear even if compilation errors out). This will NOT work however if the PDF viewer was closed in between: an error will mean that the PDF viewer won't be called.
Liviu > Scott -- Do you think you know what math is? http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/ian-stewart-2013-08-02 Or what it means to be intelligent? http://www.ideasroadshow.com/issues/john-duncan-2013-08-30 Think again: http://www.ideasroadshow.com/library
