José Matos wrote:
On Wednesday 29 November 2006 7:32 am, Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Here is my view of the subject FWIW: The problem is that you are
discouraging Georg and probably other to further update tex2lyx. I can
personally can see the advantages of a python implementation (easier
maintenance, easier upgrades, etc) but, right now, this is just vaporware.
Sure, I have never said the opposite. My purpose is also not to discourage
anyone from improving tex2lyx, an healthy competition is always in our best
interest.
Well, I'd rather let Georg concentrate his free time on improving LyX
instead.
Now, if your plan is really to do that RSN and you reckon you can
achieve the same level of completeness as tex2lyx then I trust your
judgement and I agree with Georg that he should not waste his time with
that.
You should clarify your plan IMHO.
My purpose is to do this for 1.6, I do not intend to start from scratch
(that would be madness) but to use different available tools, that I have
described in other messages.
Yes, I've read the archive now... sorry. One strong point of tex2lyx
though is that it let the lyx core output the file so there will never
be a lag between file format revision. Is my interpretation correct Georg?
One good compromise will be to do the tex parsing in python (with the
help of those external tool) and use boost::python inside tex2lyx for
the conversion to the lyx inset model.
Abdel.
