On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:41:55PM +0200, Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > Georg Baum wrote: > >And then look at the very recent marginal bug: AFAIK (correct me if I am > >wrong) this happened because of missing review of the insetName -> name > >change. > > Small correction: this bug appeared in the InsetOld -> Inset transfer > with the removal of setInsetName(). Nothin to do with the insetName -> > name change. > > >A simple and safe looking change caused a serious bug. > > About this particular one, I proposed to make the method pure virtual, > any objection?
Unless you do not end up with 85 implementations, that's fine with me. Andre'
