Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > 1) would be costly in terms of performance > 2) would add be need a bit more cpu and would have the side effect that > kerning would not be as good Qt's word drawing. This is what we do already > for arabic and hebrew. > 3) is a very big task and an entirely unknown territory. Our pixmap backend > is very fast and has been optimized through the years... I am not sure we > can get achieve the same performance with QTextEdit for a 1000 pages of > rich text. > > So, all in all, I vote for (2) as an lyxrc option. That is the easiest to > implement and offers the best tradeoff between performance and beauty.
yes. i take back what i have said about the annoyance, i didn't get that the report is about already fixed bug (though not released yet). pavel
