Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >>>>>>> "Georg" == Georg Baum >>>>>>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>>>> writes: >> >> Georg> It is already ugly, adding one more special test to 3 existing >> Georg> ones is only a little bit uglier :-) > > FYI, most of the ugliness was due to the support of qt3 and gtk (I > didn't want to break the toc controller at the time). Now that these are > out, I guess there's some code that can go.
Above I was talking about the code that calls the addtoToc methods of those insets that have one. The uglyness of that code has nothing to do with frontends, but with the fact that addToToc is no virtual method of InsetBase. I guess that you answered to my earlier statement that toc.h and TocBackend.h are not exactly clean, but even that has nothing to do with frontends. ControlToc and the frontends know about toc::TocIterator, toc::TocItem and toc::Toc. The frontends have nothing to do with the strange interweaving of toc and TocBackend. Basically I don't understand why we need a TocBackend at all. 1.4 (with 3 frontends) does not need it. Why was it not possible to extend the classes in toc.h with the new functionality? Georg
