On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 11:50:31PM +0200, Dov Feldstern wrote:
>
>
> Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 05, 2007 at 11:13:34PM +0200, Dov Feldstern wrote:
>>> Martin Vermeer wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 05 Nov 2007 15:49:22 +0100
>>>> Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>>>>> Martin Vermeer <martin.vermeer-RGpGn/[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But I am not sure I understand. Why is forceLTR true for ERT? Just
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> display purpose?
>>> The truth is, it shouldn't be. We're overloading the usage of forceLTR
>>> --- a slight misunderstanding between me and Martin. I actually suggested
>>> having *two* separate options in the layout: "forceLTR" and "Language".
>>> Almost always, these properties would be set together. But ERT is a good
>>> example where only "Language" should be set.
>>>
>>> So now, the question becomes "Why is Language set to latex_language for
>>> ERT?"
>>>
>>> And I believe the answer is: "Yes, just for display purpose".
>> Urm... I think we have already too many overloads of everything
>> according to _what it is_ ('language' / 'ERT') instead of how it
>> acts ('display LTR without fancy guessing'). Why not have virtual
>> function in Inset for all 'acting'?
>
> I'm not sure how this would work in practice: do you mean that instead of
> having "forceRTL", "allowEmpty", "isFreeSpacing"..., to have only a single
> method which would output the contents accordingly?
No, those three are just fine. inset->lyxCode() == FOO_CODE isn't.
Andre'
