Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote: > Richard Heck wrote: > >> The attached addresses http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3650. The >> issues were two. (i) When the old inset was erased, the iterator became >> invalid, and the attempt to increment it caused an abort; (ii) after >> clearing that up, a different abort made it clear that the cursor >> position needed to be updated so it wouldn't be past the end of the text. >> >> Testing requested, as well as two commit OKs if it seems all right. >> > This is getting more and more a mess. However, I don't have a better > solution. > We really should clean up this bibitem issue for 1.6. > Yes. I'll leave some notes in the source about this. >> (iii) Change the layout of one of >> these paragraphs to Standard. Shouldn't the bibitem be erased? (This >> could be handled in checkBiblio without too much effort.) >> As Uwe pointed out, this would break the bibliography. So there's really a larger issue.
Richard -- ================================================================== Richard G Heck, Jr Professor of Philosophy Brown University http://frege.brown.edu/heck/ ================================================================== Get my public key from http://sks.keyserver.penguin.de Hash: 0x1DE91F1E66FFBDEC Learn how to sign your email using Thunderbird and GnuPG at: http://dudu.dyn.2-h.org/nist/gpg-enigmail-howto
