On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 07:51:43PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > > Le 18/02/2022 à 17:18, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > In whatever part of LyX's code that marks a buffer as dirty, should we > > assert that the document is not read-only? > > > > If I open the User Guide from the Help menu, editing is disabled. But if I > > run: > > > > command-sequence inset-forall Caption char-delete-forward; statistics; > > undo > > > > The buffer is marked as dirty. I'm not sure if something actually > > changed, but I wonder if a general way to catch these types of issues is > > to add an assertion. But perhaps there are some cases where it is hard > > to know if the buffer is dirty (maybe with Undo?) so we mark it as dirty > > just in case? > > Actually, the buffer is marked dirty when a recordUndo happens. > > Several things come to mind: > 1/ in LFUN_BUFFER_FORALL, we do a recordUndo before dispatching each > command. There is no reason for that IMO (it was my doing, but there are no > explanations). > 2/ all undo operations should be no-ops when buffer is read-only (unless I > am missing something important). > > 1/ is done at 48ee2fd0, > 2/ is done at bfe98181. > > Hope I did not overlook something.
Thanks! Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
