Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Abdel. | | Index: buffer_funcs.cpp | =================================================================== | --- buffer_funcs.cpp (revision 19485) | +++ buffer_funcs.cpp (working copy) | @@ -614,4 +616,25 @@ | } | } | | + | +void loadChildDocuments(Buffer const & buf) | +{ | + bool parse_error = false; | + | + for (InsetIterator it = inset_iterator_begin(buf.inset()); it; ++it) {
Should the test be comparing against the end-iterator instead? Would be clearer if possible, nand fit better with other uses of iterators. But I see that this is done in old code as well, so don't mind to much. Should probably we changed later on though. | Index: BufferView.cpp | =================================================================== | --- BufferView.cpp (revision 19485) | +++ BufferView.cpp (working copy) | @@ -872,21 +752,21 @@ It seems that almost all changes to BufferView is buffer_-> to buffer_. changes. | Index: BufferView.h | =================================================================== | --- BufferView.h (revision 19485) | +++ BufferView.h (working copy) | @@ -269,7 +263,7 @@ | /// | CoordCache coord_cache_; | /// | - Buffer * buffer_; | + Buffer & buffer_; To keep the size of the patch down I think you should leave this as Buffer * buffer_; | Index: frontends/controllers/ControlTabular.cpp | =================================================================== | --- frontends/controllers/ControlTabular.cpp (revision 19485) | +++ frontends/controllers/ControlTabular.cpp (working copy) | @@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ | // assume that it is "ours" | for (int i = cur.depth() - 1; i >= 0; --i) | if (cur[i].inset().lyxCode() == Inset::TABULAR_CODE) { | - current_inset = static_cast<InsetTabular const *>(&cur[i].inset()); | + current_inset = static_cast<InsetTabular *>(&cur[i].inset()); Why is const wrong? Your patch is very big (size wise) and I am afraid that at least to me that muddles a bit what is happening in it, and it really is tiresome to read such huge patches. -- Lgb