On Thu, Mar 11, 2004 at 09:41:13AM +0100, Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > I mean, I'm sure you know it's not the only open bug in current cvs.
He he :) (never ashamed to overuse emoticons myself!) > > o how wide is the box > > o what width does a char want (for full width insets: 100%, for > > minipage etc. (eg 25%), for others, 'natural width') > > Why would anyone want to waste the 75% of the screen!?? I think it's really > silly to represent %col in a wysiwyg way. Then full row insets are already > represented by the display() bool. Minipages. If I set two minipages to 50% it would be nice if they appeared next to each other, like they used to. That's all. > Used? In 1.3.x times we didn't have this problem, because the were no > "natural-width" insets. I could go back to 1.3.x behaviour right now by > switching all inset->display to true. Colour me dubious about this. I think things would still be broken. > > > The "should I break the line" function then becomes something like: > > > > if (char->ideal_width(remaining_width, max_width) > remaining_width) > > break_line(); > > So what is your ideal_width? What kind of heuristic optimization does it? > For instance, given the following, where the size of the inset [I] is yet > to be decided, what does ideal_width return? (suppose of course that it's > *not* a full row inset; nowadays full row insets are only displayed math > and tables IIRC; it's simply a "natural width" inset as all > insettext-derived ones in today's setup) > > blah blah blah [I] blah > blah blah blah blah blah bla I don't understand your example. Row breaking is done in left-to-right, top-to-bottom manner, how could the above ever have an unknown width ? > The only real problem I see with the current implementation is the inset > placement in the first position of the first indented line of a paragraph. > It is probably easy IMHO to find a quick solution for that without changing > the overall scheme... This seems really silly. Andre chose to go down the path of rewriting lyx so things could be done right this time, and you want to re-add some curious hack? What about indentation due to bullets ? Ever placed a fullrow inset on a bullet line (in 1.3 or 1.4, it goes wrong). > [for instance, a "solution" that would work reasonably well in most (all?) > cases is to add this 'special casing': a single char on a row, if it's > wider than the avail width the we could draw it without using the row > indent: it's anyways better than what we do now: to make it exceed to the > right] This sort of thing is what helped make lyx unmaintainable in the first place IMHO. regards, john -- "Spammers get STABBED by GOD." - Ron Echeverri
