On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 10:21:47PM +0200, Vincent van Ravesteijn wrote: > >>>> As to the proposed patch, I'd like to hear the opinion of math users. >>>> >>> After some further investigation I found out that the bug was introduced >>> in changeset 10553: "Output \\ at the end of the last line if it is >>> empty (fixes bug 2067)". This is wrong, because outputting an extra "\\" >>> would mean that you really add an extra row. In the example of bug 2969, >>> this is visible because this extra line gets a number. In the first part >>> of the patch I reverted this change. I have no clue where bug 2067 is >>> about. Juergen, you can probably help me out here (it's your bug). At >>> least I can't seem to reproduce. >>> >> >> No idea. This is 4 years back, and I'm actually surprised I've ever >> reported a mathed bug (I guess I was just recording a user report from >> the list). >> >> However, your explanations strike me sensible. Just check the reported >> undo bug doesn't come back. >> >> > Hmm, that's the problem, the action that would lead to this bug is not > possible anymore. >> No idea either. Does it make a difference wrt the indendation of >> subsequent paragraphs? >> > > Maybe Andre knows: > http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/5532
I don't remember whether this was fixing something critical or whether it was just somone complaining that the result didn't look nice in his text editor. One thing to take care of in this area is not to produce completely empty lines, as this can create broken LaTeX. One option I had been thinking about for a while was to use two passes for output: One to create proper LaTeX in possibly very long lines, and a second one to split those lines according to some simple pattern matching rules. Probably quite a bit slower, but a lot less fragile in both passes... Andre'
