* Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 12:58]:
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010503 18:49]:
| My immediate todo list:
| - lists of floats
| - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
| - try out the visitor
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 14:28]:
| Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| | The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| | enter free text strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
| | be
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 14:28]:
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| enter free text strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
| be allowed to enter the lfun. If the lfun requires an
On 04-May-2001 John Levon wrote:
Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
toes if he finds time to have a go at tabular spellcheck + find/replace.
Please keep on reminding me. I'm quite busy at the moment with various
projects (most of them I get money for
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 13:47]:
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | We should try to have the next version stabilized soon so that our users
| | who want something better than 1.1.5fixN will be able to upgrade. The
| | tables code in 1.1.6fix2 will not have
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | We should try to have the next version stabilized soon so that our users
| | who want something better than 1.1.5fixN will be able to upgrade. The
| | tables code in 1.1.6fix2 will not have all fixes and we need to
| | stabilize that before we go on.
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| enter free text strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
| be allowed to enter the lfun. If the lfun requires an argument it will
| be asked for (or more than one). To do
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote:
On 04-May-2001 John Levon wrote:
Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
toes if he finds time to have a go at tabular spellcheck + find/replace.
Please keep on reminding me. I'm quite busy at the moment with
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 15:18]:
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010504 14:28]:
| Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| | The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| | enter free
This is fine, the current lfun's do not require arguments so this
transitional flaw is of no concern.
math-macro-arg required an argument last time I looked...
Andre'
--
André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Baruch Even wrote:
For my defence I only have the fact the only LFUN_HELP_OPEN says in
LyXAction.C that it takes arguments, the others have no mention of it in
their definition.
Why is this inconsistency? If Argument is unneeded, remove it. If it's
needed why are the
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 12:58]:
> Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | * Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010503 18:49]:
> | > My immediate todo list:
> | > - lists of floats
> | > - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
> | > - try
Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 14:28]:
| > Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | > The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| > | > enter "free text" strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 14:28]:
> Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
> | > enter "free text" strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
> | > be allowed to enter the lfun. If the
On 04-May-2001 John Levon wrote:
> Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
> toes if he finds time to have a go at tabular spellcheck + find/replace.
Please keep on reminding me. I'm quite busy at the moment with various
projects (most of them I get money for
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 13:47]:
> Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | > | We should try to have the next version stabilized soon so that our users
> | > | who want something better than 1.1.5fixN will be able to upgrade. The
> | > | tables code in 1.1.6fix2
Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | We should try to have the next version stabilized soon so that our users
| > | who want something better than 1.1.5fixN will be able to upgrade. The
| > | tables code in 1.1.6fix2 will not have all fixes and we need to
| > | stabilize that before we
Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
| > enter "free text" strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
| > be allowed to enter the lfun. If the lfun requires an argument it will
| > be asked for (or more than one).
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Juergen Vigna wrote:
>
> On 04-May-2001 John Levon wrote:
>
> > Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
> > toes if he finds time to have a go at tabular spellcheck + find/replace.
>
> Please keep on reminding me. I'm quite busy at the
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 15:18]:
> Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | * Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 14:28]:
> | > Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | > The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
>
> This is fine, the current lfun's do not require arguments so this
> transitional flaw is of no concern.
math-macro-arg required an argument last time I looked...
Andre'
--
André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 4 May 2001, Baruch Even wrote:
> For my defence I only have the fact the only LFUN_HELP_OPEN says in
> LyXAction.C that it takes arguments, the others have no mention of it in
> their definition.
>
> Why is this inconsistency? If Argument is unneeded, remove it. If it's
> needed why
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
|
| - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
|
| can you expand on this for the slow ones in the audience ?
The intention was long ago to have a base LyXView and have child
classes for gui,
Baruch Even [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010503 18:49]:
| My immediate todo list:
| - lists of floats
| - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
| - try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
|
| Even though I was the
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010503 18:49]:
My immediate todo list:
- lists of floats
- try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
- try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
Even though I was the one who raised the third point, wouldn't it be
better
All code that were inactive when NEW_INSETS was defined are now
removed.
I am free to take patches again.
My immediate todo list:
- lists of floats
- try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
- try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
--
Lgb
On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
btw. The minibuffer is almost ready for GUII, should now be quite easy
to split in gui/non-gui.
hoped so, I was going to have a go at this one.
Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
toes if he finds
On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
- try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
can you expand on this for the slow ones in the audience ?
thanks
john
--
Thought you saw your sig ? I stole it.
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
|
| can you expand on this for the slow ones in the audience ?
The intention was long ago to have a base LyXView and have child
classes for gui,
Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| * Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010503 18:49]:
| > My immediate todo list:
| > - lists of floats
| > - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
| > - try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
|
| Even though I
* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010503 18:49]:
> My immediate todo list:
> - lists of floats
> - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
> - try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
Even though I was the one who raised the third point, wouldn't it be
All code that were inactive when NEW_INSETS was defined are now
removed.
I am free to take patches again.
My immediate todo list:
- lists of floats
- try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
- try out the visitor pattern on the inset write methods.
--
Lgb
On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
> btw. The minibuffer is almost ready for GUII, should now be quite easy
> to split in gui/non-gui.
hoped so, I was going to have a go at this one.
Also spellcheck needs doing, but I'm not sure about stepping on Juergen's
toes if he finds
On 3 May 2001, Lars Gullik [iso-8859-1] Bjønnes wrote:
> - try out dymmy LyXView/BufferView
can you expand on this for the slow ones in the audience ?
thanks
john
--
"Thought you saw your sig ? I stole it."
Unless I get a lot of protests I will begin to slowly cleanup the
NEW_INSETS ifdef mess.
I will begin with LyXParagraph and progressto LyXText.
I will leave code that is particularly interesting or that is not
quite working in the NEW_INSETS case.
--
Lgb
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:24:37PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Unless I get a lot of protests I will begin to slowly cleanup the
NEW_INSETS ifdef mess.
I will begin with LyXParagraph and progressto LyXText.
I will leave code that is particularly interesting or that is not
quite
Unless I get a lot of protests I will begin to slowly cleanup the
NEW_INSETS ifdef mess.
I will begin with LyXParagraph and progressto LyXText.
I will leave code that is particularly interesting or that is not
quite working in the NEW_INSETS case.
--
Lgb
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 09:24:37PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> Unless I get a lot of protests I will begin to slowly cleanup the
> NEW_INSETS ifdef mess.
>
> I will begin with LyXParagraph and progressto LyXText.
> I will leave code that is partic
John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I know of only a couple of problems:
|
| - floats support are a bit lacking, specially algoritm will
|have problems.
|
| does this also include the fact that getTocList() doesn't work (generating
| no contents for the dialog to
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > I know of only a couple of problems:
| >
| > - floats support are a bit lacking, specially algoritm will
| > have problems.
|
| does this also include the fact that getTocList() doesn't work (generating
| no contents for the dialog
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 02:30:55AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjnnes wrote:
I have removed all !NEW_INSETS cruft from the sources in the
BRANCH_new_insets branch. It seems to me that it works very well but
I'd like to have some more testers.
SGML might also be a problem.
I know, I will work
On Sun, Jan 14, 2001 at 02:30:55AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> I have removed all !NEW_INSETS cruft from the sources in the
> BRANCH_new_insets branch. It seems to me that it works very well but
> I'd like to have some more testers.
>
> SGML might also be a pro
I have removed all !NEW_INSETS cruft from the sources in the
BRANCH_new_insets branch. It seems to me that it works very well but
I'd like to have some more testers.
At least the Userguide loads nicely.
I know of only a couple of problems:
- floats support are a bit lacking
I have removed all !NEW_INSETS cruft from the sources in the
BRANCH_new_insets branch. It seems to me that it works very well but
I'd like to have some more testers.
At least the Userguide loads nicely.
I know of only a couple of problems:
- floats support are a bit lacking
Whilst verifying that
http://sourceforge.net/bugs/?func=detailbugbug_id=123609group_id=15212
is OLD_INSETS specific, I needed the attached patch to compile with
NEW_INSETS, if it's of use to anyone.
thanks
john
--
"Abstinence in moderation."
Index: sr
Whilst verifying that
http://sourceforge.net/bugs/?func=detailbug_id=123609_id=15212
is OLD_INSETS specific, I needed the attached patch to compile with
NEW_INSETS, if it's of use to anyone.
thanks
john
--
"Abstinence in moderation."
Index: sr
Gaillard Pierre-Olivier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| "Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote:
|
|
| Because it is not finished yet.
|
|
| So, what is your advice, should I work with NEW_INSETS defined or
| without it ? I prefer to work with NEW_INSETS since the code is nicer,
| but I am rea
Gaillard Pierre-Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| "Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote:
| >
|
| > Because it is not finished yet.
| >
|
| So, what is your advice, should I work with NEW_INSETS defined or
| without it ? I prefer to work with NEW_INSETS since the code i
Gaillard Pierre-Olivier [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Hello,
|
| I have currently reached the point where I can read back XML-Lyx data
| (fonts, tables and a few simple things).
| But it seems that there are many things I do not understand :
| - why is NEW_INSETS not the default ?
Because
"Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote:
Because it is not finished yet.
So, what is your advice, should I work with NEW_INSETS defined or
without it ? I prefer to work with NEW_INSETS since the code is nicer,
but I am ready to work on older code to make something that works.
Also, is th
Gaillard Pierre-Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hello,
|
| I have currently reached the point where I can read back XML-Lyx data
| (fonts, tables and a few simple things).
| But it seems that there are many things I do not understand :
| - why is NEW_INSETS not the default ?
B
"Lars Gullik Bjønnes" wrote:
>
> Because it is not finished yet.
>
So, what is your advice, should I work with NEW_INSETS defined or
without it ? I prefer to work with NEW_INSETS since the code is nicer,
but I am ready to work on older code to make somethin
Hello,
I have currently reached the point where I can read back XML-Lyx data
(fonts, tables and a few simple things).
But it seems that there are many things I do not understand :
- why is NEW_INSETS not the default ?
- when I define NEW_INSETS, I cannot create frames anymore
Hello,
I have currently reached the point where I can read back XML-Lyx data
(fonts, tables and a few simple things).
But it seems that there are many things I do not understand :
- why is NEW_INSETS not the default ?
- when I define NEW_INSETS, I cannot create frames anymore
"John" == John Levon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
John So l[TOC_LOF] et al are never filled What am I missing ?
With new insets, floats are moved to a new inset structure, so the
code should be rewritten to handle these float insets.
JMarc
> "John" == John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
John> So l[TOC_LOF] et al are never filled What am I missing ?
With new insets, floats are moved to a new inset structure, so the
code should be rewritten to handle these float insets.
JMarc
someone
| double check it works for xforms/kde, because my older CVS at home doesn't
| seem to have this problem ...
|
|
| In fact turning off NEW_INSETS, I don't see a problem, it works fine. Lars
| ? Or is this not supposed to be working yet ?
NEW_INSETS are supposed to be working
With new insets, my FormRef dialog never gets the labels in figure floats
that I have in a document (but gets the labels in sections fine). And
dispatching a GOTO_REF after explicitly opening up that reference gives
the "label not found" error.
Lars, I'm sorry I can't debug this further, but I
| > from getTocList seems to empty, even when it shouldn't be. Can someone
> | > double check it works for xforms/kde, because my older CVS at home doesn't
> | > seem to have this problem ...
> | >
> |
> | In fact turning off NEW_INSETS, I don't see a problem, it works fine
With new insets, my FormRef dialog never gets the labels in figure floats
that I have in a document (but gets the labels in sections fine). And
dispatching a GOTO_REF after explicitly opening up that reference gives
the "label not found" error.
Lars, I'm sorry I can't debug this further, but I
(gdb) p fd_form_table_options
$1 = (FD_form_table_options *) 0x0
Could you have a look at this Jürgen?
Well I guess a #ifndef NEW_TABULAR around that call would solve the
situation! Something like:
#ifndef NEW_TABULAR
if (fd_form_table_options-form_table_options-visible)
> (gdb) p fd_form_table_options
> $1 = (FD_form_table_options *) 0x0
>
> Could you have a look at this Jürgen?
Well I guess a #ifndef NEW_TABULAR around that call would solve the
situation! Something like:
#ifndef NEW_TABULAR
if
62 matches
Mail list logo
