Richard Heck <rgh...@comcast.net> writes: > I see what this does now, and I like it. I'm not sure if this feature > should be independent of passthru or not. Are there or might there be > cases where one might be wanted but not the other? I guess I'd be > inclined to separate them, i.e., do the other patch, too, unless that > seems a hassle.
The problem is that many things were operated by direct checks on ERT/LISTINGS_CODE in the past, and it is not easy to translate them back to general semantics. I can resurrect the other patch (I would not mind a better name), but it will probably necessitate to nuke runparams.pass_thru to work, because I think it is used for both purposes. > Hmm. Well, short of trying to make lyx2lyx layout-aware, I have no > idea what to do about this. That said, the old behavior is surely > broken. I could hardcode the names of layouts that need it (Chunk, Scrap, there are some others in chess and elsart, but I think they are wrong) and convert those. But I really do not know how to write this lyx2lyx stuff. > By the way, this patch does have some "NewLine 1" stuff in it.... Where? JMarc
