Dear Jean-Marc, dear listmembers,
just to give you an opinion about that: a "clickable" section / subsection /
chapter offering a field for entering a "shorty" for the table of contents
sounds best to me (despite whatever changes ought to occur in the LyX code).
I think this is easy to keep
On 17 Sep 1999 17:56:07 +0200, Lars Gullik Bj°nnes wrote:
>"Arnd Hanses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>| It won't help anybody, if you still continue to export all your soon
>| 10,000 global inter-module interface symbols; even now you have 3026
>| public symbol exports (functions and variables
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 06:13:45PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> Jose> Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
> Jose> this solution should be more general than just for title.
>
> The s
> "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jose> Since there are several cases, such as figure captions, maybe
Jose> this solution should be more general than just for title.
The solution I have in mind would work for sections and captions. What
we have to know is
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 05:49:29PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
[...]
> I'm sure there should be some adjustments to this scheme to make it
> reasonably general. In particular, we should use the same scheme for
> both LaTeX and SGM
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 04:42:57PM +0100, Horst G Kausch wrote:
>
> > I notice from your header that you are using an "old" version, that
> > still is related with docbook 3.0. The new header is related with
> > docbook 3.1 as used in the last sgmltools cvs version, soon to become
> > 2.0.3
> >
"Arnd Hanses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Which should not be too hard ;),
| since so-called 'software industry' in fact is no industry and never
| produced code meeting common industrial engineering standards, aka with
| 10 years of legally effective guaranty for functionality, safety and
| s
"Arnd Hanses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| It won't help anybody, if you still continue to export all your soon
| 10,000 global inter-module interface symbols; even now you have 3026
| public symbol exports (functions and variables) in LyX 1.0.x global
| name space.
As said. 1.0.x is defunct i
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > You can't use archives (*.a ) for static linkage???
| > Even if you have provided for them, nobody is forced to
| > actually link dynamically. The main purpose is speeding up development.
| >
|
| You never had a look at the 1.1.x codebase
> "Amir" == Amir Karger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Amir> Question for the latex gurus in the audience. One popular
Amir> complaint about lyx 1.0 is that you can't get the equivalent of
Amir> \section[short]{long section title}.
Amir> Well, perhaps this has been discussed before, but couldn
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999, Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 08:55:29PM +0100, Horst G Kausch wrote:
> > I have now takem your sample document and added sections illustrating the
> > problems I have with nested lists and wrongly &-quoted characters in the
> > Code environmen
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 15:58:30 +0200 (MEST), Juergen Vigna wrote:
>know that we have at least 2 *.a (libgui.a + libsupport.a) and a bunch
>of *.o in subdirectories (which could also be *.a files)
I know... This question was purely rhetoric.. :)
No, earnestly, some time ago I had a small discussio
On 17 Sep 1999 14:58:11 +0200, Lars Gullik Bj°nnes wrote:
>| > frustrations, soon stabilize an industrial quality code base and enable
>|
>| *grin* industrial quality? I always thought LyX could do much better.
>
>We will.
Which should not be too hard ;),
since so-called 'software industry' in
>
> You can't use archives (*.a ) for static linkage???
> Even if you have provided for them, nobody is forced to
> actually link dynamically. The main purpose is speeding up development.
>
You never had a look at the 1.1.x codebase, had you? Then you would
know that we have at least 2 *.
On 17 Sep 1999 14:36:26 +0200, Lars Gullik Bj°nnes wrote:
>
>| - My idea here is to restrict messages so as to simply print to a log
>| file/named pipe with a tag that identifies and classifies the message
>| using only standardized functions. The respective gui wizard would then
>| decide how an
"Andre' Poenitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I think one should only use features supported by more than one
| compiler, even if this means you can't use all of these fancy new
| gimmicks in the standard.
This is why we will not introduce namespaces and exceptions yet.
vector<>'s and the like
On 16 Sep 1999 18:50:58 +0200, Lars Gullik Bj°nnes wrote:
>
>When 1.0.4 is released we will open up development on the new 1.1.x
>series and shortly after that some new stable releases with no new
>users features will be released (except to modules that are under
>continued development DocBook an
"Arnd Hanses" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Am I wrong, that the ANSI C++ library is on very few systems (namely
| sgi) available as a manually optimized and thoroughly debugged option?
Yes, I believe you are wrong.
AFAIK all major compiler vendors have released new versions of their
products s
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 01:54:03PM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
[...]
> Jose> I was really surprised with your creative name scheme. ;-)
>
> Yes, sometimes I cannot help being creative...
:-)
> JMarc
>
> PS: are there other things you need for docbook support?
Not for the moment
> "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jose> Thanks Jean-Marc.:-) BTW, the test works for me. Great!
That's good.
>> Note that LinuxDoc classes are now defined with
>> \DeclareLinuxDocClass while the docbook classes use (surprise!)
>> \DeclareDocBookClass.
Jo
>
> If I understood forms home page correctly, 0.89 is not a production
> release, yet a 'for evaluation only' version, released for a fraction
> of the supported systems. For non-experimental use they still only
> support 0.88.
>
That's what I've seen too!!! Therefor I'm still using 0.88!
Gre
> Am I wrong, that the ANSI C++ library is on very few systems (namely
> sgi) available as a manually optimized and thoroughly debugged option?
AFAIK, yes.
> Using this means asking for complaints for bugs/slow performance. So it
> might be a good idea to provide (precompiled and tested/debugge
On Fri, 17 Sep 1999 11:18:50 +0200 (MET DST), Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
wrote:
>> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bj nnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>Lars> It looks like math_symbols.C contains one line that is the only
>Lars> place where we use a function from libXpm that is not in XForms:
>
>You forgot
On 16 Sep 1999 18:50:58 +0200, Lars Gullik Bj°nnes wrote:
>If you have comments or questions too this, please step onto the
>soapbox.
>
> Lgb
[...]
> - use of std::string
[...]
>An other change that
>will impace users is the move to more modern C++, we aim to begin use
>the Standar
On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 08:55:29PM +0100, Horst G Kausch wrote:
> I have now takem your sample document and added sections illustrating the
> problems I have with nested lists and wrongly &-quoted characters in the
> Code environment.
I have generated a new sample file with the last cvs source
On Fri, Sep 17, 1999 at 11:11:46AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> OK, since I was supposed to do this a looong time ago, I finally wrote
> the needed code. Please try it out, since I do not have either of the
> sgmlt
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> It looks like math_symbols.C contains one line that is the only
Lars> place where we use a function from libXpm that is not in XForms:
You forgot bmtable.C, too.
JMarc
> "Jose" == Jose Abilio Oliveira Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jose> On Thu, Sep 16, 1999 at 12:55:35PM +0100, Horst G Kausch wrote:
>> I had downloaded the source for release 1.0.4pre6 and compiled
>> it. It had the following problems:
>>
>> 1) The configure script did not find my sgmlt
28 matches
Mail list logo
