On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Joacim> What's left is the
> Joacim> problem with the ::Clone() method (which *should* have been a
> Joacim> copy constructor), and the funny behaviour of the cursor in
> Joacim> the Extra options input fields.
>
> I *think* the Clone problem would be solved if cell_struct, row_struct
> and col_struct each had a proper operator=. You might want to try that.
fixed it already with a one-liner
working on the cursor problem right now
>
> Joacim> There's one thing I can't figure out though: If I add a row at
> Joacim> the very end of a table, the previous row retains its bottom
> Joacim> line (thus the appended row is separated from the rest of the
> Joacim> table, like the head of the table is). Is that intentional or
> Joacim> a misfeature?
>
> Don't know.
I just leave it as it is; I'm afraid it'll all fall asunder if I touch too
much.
> Keep in mind that when Matthias implemented that, he already said it
> was a hack :) Juergen and Alejandro did a bit of work on that in 1.1 ,
> so I think it is better now. At least, it is a proper inset, and there
> is no more code everywhere in normal paragraph handling.
1.1 tables works...a lot ;) (goes into spinlock on multicolumn+linebreaks
sometimes)
A complete rewrite from scratch using a more orthodox OO-design is what I'd
recommend (but *I* don't want to do it =) ...maybe that's what they're
doing in 1.1; I haven't looked at that code yet.
> The part on \multicolumn in the LaTeX 2.09 manual seems to imply that
> p can be used.
It's a relic then. (unless 2e still supports it somehow, maybe it just
ignore it) ..again, I don't dare touching things to much.
Joacim
-
All programmers are playwrights and all computers are lousy actors.
