>> The question, basically, is why you're making use of getOptions. My >> understanding was that getOptions and setOptions (and some other things) >> were scheduled for removal because they're some kind of relic of an >> older >> way in which insets interacted with parameters. (There are other >> routines >> in the same box.) > > The parameter communication between inset and GUI is done by > ParamVector param_, and setOption is the only way to set it. I do not > know why it needs to be removed, and what other route I can take. > > I quickly scanned other InsetCommand derived insets, and they do not > seem to set param_ at all.
If you look at InsetCommandParams, you'll see that params_ is set in read(), and the other InsetCommand derived insets call read() when they need to set params_. (When they need to read the params, they just get params_ directly via params() and index into it.) That's what I meant when I said that using [gs]etOptions is an older way of doing this. But Georg and Abdel are the ones who really know about this. Richard
