On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 09:06:59PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement in-place
editing of macro arguments ?
I guess we need a differentiation between simple macros which could be
edited in-place, and complicated.
What we have now would be for
On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 09:06:59PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement in-place
editing of macro arguments ?
I guess we need a differentiation between simple macros which could be
edited in-place, and complicated.
What we have now would be for
On Sat, Mar 15, 2003 at 09:06:59PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement "in-place"
> editing of macro arguments ?
I guess we need a differentiation between "simple" macros which could be
edited in-place, and "complicated".
What we have now would
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
7. Same for user defined macro expansion. It's rather annoying when
moving the cursor through a big equation.
I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement in-place
editing of macro arguments ?
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
7. Same for user defined macro expansion. It's rather annoying when
moving the cursor through a big equation.
I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement in-place
editing of macro arguments ?
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
>
> 7. Same for user defined macro expansion. It's rather annoying when
>moving the cursor through a big equation.
I agree. Andre, is there any chance that you will implement "in-place"
editing of macro arguments ?
Andreas == Andreas Buening [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unfortunately, I get the same problem. It seems to be a rather
fundemental one so you have to keep the old lyx1.2.3 :-(
I guess, it's a rather trivial one. You just have to add a magic
flag and it will work. ;-)
Unfortunately,
Andreas == Andreas Buening [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unfortunately, I get the same problem. It seems to be a rather
fundemental one so you have to keep the old lyx1.2.3 :-(
I guess, it's a rather trivial one. You just have to add a magic
flag and it will work. ;-)
Unfortunately,
> "Andreas" == Andreas Buening <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > > Unfortunately, I get the same problem. It seems to be a rather
>> > > fundemental one so you have to keep the "old" lyx1.2.3 :-(
>> >
>> > I guess, it's a rather trivial one. You just have to add a magic
>> flag > and it will
Hello!
I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
and AIX systems. Could you kindly provide some precompiled binaries?
2. The compilation on AIX terminates with:
g++ -O2 -Wno-non-template-friend -ftemplate
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
5. In math mode code like x \ne 0 is transformed to x\ne0 for LaTeX
output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
Why?
$x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
5. In math mode code like x \ne 0 is transformed to x\ne0 for LaTeX
output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
Why?
$x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Oops. Yes, you're right. It was a user defined
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Andreas Buening wrote:
Hello!
I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
and AIX systems. Could you kindly provide some precompiled binaries?
I compiled xforms on aix5.1
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:01:44PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
I prefer LyX would write $x\ne 0$ or $x \ne 0$, as it is more human readable.
Feel free to fix this without breaking something.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Andreas Buening wrote:
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
[snip]
I compiled xforms on aix5.1 without problem.
How? I had to use about dozens of make flags to get it working.
Ooops, maybe you are right, maybe I downloaded xforms from:
Hello!
I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
and AIX systems. Could you kindly provide some precompiled binaries?
2. The compilation on AIX terminates with:
g++ -O2 -Wno-non-template-friend -ftemplate
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
5. In math mode code like x \ne 0 is transformed to x\ne0 for LaTeX
output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
Why?
$x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
5. In math mode code like x \ne 0 is transformed to x\ne0 for LaTeX
output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
Why?
$x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Oops. Yes, you're right. It was a user defined
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Andreas Buening wrote:
Hello!
I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
and AIX systems. Could you kindly provide some precompiled binaries?
I compiled xforms on aix5.1
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:01:44PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
I prefer LyX would write $x\ne 0$ or $x \ne 0$, as it is more human readable.
Feel free to fix this without breaking something.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
Andreas Buening wrote:
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
[snip]
I compiled xforms on aix5.1 without problem.
How? I had to use about dozens of make flags to get it working.
Ooops, maybe you are right, maybe I downloaded xforms from:
Hello!
I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
and AIX systems. Could you kindly provide some precompiled binaries?
2. The compilation on AIX terminates with:
g++ -O2 -Wno-non-template-friend -ftemplate
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
> 5. In math mode code like "x \ne 0" is transformed to "x\ne0" for LaTeX
>output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
Why?
$x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 01:59:36PM +0100, Andreas Buening wrote:
> > 5. In math mode code like "x \ne 0" is transformed to "x\ne0" for LaTeX
> >output which makes lyx basically unusable for me.
>
> Why?
>
> $x\ne0$ is LaTeX-wise equivalent to $x \ne 0$
Oops. Yes, you're right. It was a
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Andreas Buening wrote:
> >
> > Hello!
> >
> > I've just been trying lyx 1.3. It had lots of problems.
> >
> > 1. It's not possible to compile xforms 1.0 out of the box for Solaris
> >and AIX systems. Could you kindly provi
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 05:01:44PM +0200, Dekel Tsur wrote:
> I prefer LyX would write $x\ne 0$ or $x \ne 0$, as it is more human readable.
Feel free to fix this without breaking something.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they
Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Andreas Buening wrote:
> >
> > Nicolas Ferre wrote:
[snip]
> > > I compiled xforms on aix5.1 without problem.
> >
> > How? I had to use about dozens of make flags to get it working.
> >
>
> Ooops, maybe you are right, maybe I downloaded xforms from:
>
27 matches
Mail list logo
