On Wed, 5 Dec 2001, John Levon wrote: > On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 04:38:09PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > > > Can someone (Jürgen?) remind me why it is a Good Thing to have every > > inset have its own LyXText? Why can't we just use the same LyXText > > for everything in a given buffer? > > how would that work ? An inset exists on one row only, but may have any number > of rows contained within it !
None of these answers (JL & LGB) actually answered my question. JL: Why wouldn't it work? If an inset is collapsed it sits within a single row with surrounding text and possibly other insets. If it's open it may span several rows (just going on the way we draw them) since it, as you say, may contain several rows. Or are you trying to tell me that an open inset is a really tall row with what would then be subrows? The lengthy documentation in lyxtext.h says: This class holds the mapping between buffer paragraphs and screen rows. So why do we need several LyXTexts instead of single one? A suitable answer could then be used to extend the current almost useless description. Maybe a few more questions might help? If we have a LyXText per inset how many LyXScreens do we have? It would seem we have just the one. Is the plan to try to localise drawing to each inset (and as Lars implied to each paragraph) in an attempt to reduce the amount of redraws needed or something like that? Allan. (ARRae)
