On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Guenter Milde <mi...@users.berlios.de> wrote: >> I wanted to get early feedback. > > To sum up the feedback: The approach (testing for a python module) is > fine. Putting the detection routine into a checkModule() function > would be even better: > * provide a re-usable means of module detection, > * hide the "ugly" try-except clause from "production code". > (even if it will be used just one time (for now)) > > Could you modify you patch by "outsourcing" the module detection to a > function?
Sure, no problem. It is clear that it may improve readability. >> Now that business is out of the way, let's have fun with some Q&A! > > Is it really fun to behave like a divorced couple or stubborn child? Why > bring up this again after we all calmed down and tried to keep > constructive? Sorry, it was indeed an attempt (lame though it may have been) at keeping the discussion constructive. So far it had succeeded. > It will not help anyone and neither LyX, nor elyxer nor > elyxer users if you call a LyX core developer a troll. I apologize for that. Alex.
