On Fri, 15 Mar 2002, Andre Poenitz wrote: > I think I had already a look at it and did not really like the coding.
You don't have to like the implementation to use the program. > But implementing it similarly to what we have for 'real' drawing with some > kind of ASCII painter is not really hard conceptually. It's just a lot of > work (two functions per inset with, say 15 lines each, times 40 inset makes > 1200 lines or so) and I just do not have the time. This is exactly why it makes sense to use an external tool. I estimate it's possible to hook that tool up with maybe 100 lines of code. So the cost/benefit ratio is much better than your own approach. Maybe that tool is written in APL or Cobol, and maybe it's a result of a thousands monkeys typing in a cage. That is not important if the tool works. > Maybe I should simply set up the framework and wait for people filling in > the gaps... You are probably right that this is a better long term solution, given the fact that eqascii is not enhanced, and therefore LyX is restricted to what it can do now. However, using eqascii would be a monotoneous improvement, and just because you can think of an even better improvement should not stop you from picking the lower hanging fruit. That said, I don't feel strongly about this or that feature. It's just a suggestion for what I thought was low hanging fruit. Greets, Asger
