Angus Leeming wrote: > Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > >> A bit hacky, though. >> >> Would be more straightforward if PosIterator had a vector instead of >> a stack as internal container, so I could have a InsetOld * >> PosIterator::inset() method. > > This is presumably not for now, but if you want neat code, why not > define SpellcheckIterator that derives from PosIterator but which > overrides operator++, operator--?
Funny idea, why not. Nevertheless, the above is still valid: right now we literally skip over !allowSpellCheck insets, abusing a little the fact that ERT doesn't allow nesting. One can think of a !allowSpellCheck inset wich allow nested child insets with allowSpellCheck == true: this situation won't work with the current patch. Alfredo
