On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 13:06:55 +0200 Thomas Friedrichsmeier <thomas.friedrichsme...@ruhr-uni-bochum.de> wrote: > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 11:39:02 +0200 > meik michalke <meik.micha...@uni-duesseldorf.de> wrote: > > i see. but select can't be limited to single selections, right? > > True, but this will be easy to add. Hang on...
Ok, done. > > as you've seen, i've added a small function called > > rk.check_for_pandoc() to the rkward R package, which checks the > > system for a pandoc installation and provides some information on > > supported formats. I suggest renaming this to rk.check.for.pandoc(), for consistency with our (questionable) naming style, so far. > > i think it should either added somewhere to RKWard's startup routine > > and its findings appended to the global .Options, and/or included > > in rk.sessionInfo() (for debugging). It is really _this_ important? With respect to previews, there is already some logic to detect if pandoc is missing altogether (https://cgit.kde.org/rkward.git/tree/rkward/windows/rkcommandeditorwindow.cpp#n917). That could/should certainly be elaborated using your checker function. Regards Thomas
pgpFV5zgUIeJX.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
