2015-05-07 21:55 GMT+02:00 Richard Heck :
> What would be nice is just to mothball "dialog". But I don't see any way
> to disable it without just removing it. Though we could do that, and
> mass-move them to frontend-qt4 (or just: frontend).
>
Note, though, that the disctinction of frontend-qt4 a
This looks like a good idea for stable, too.
On 05/07/2015 02:24 PM, Georg Baum wrote:
commit b0e387e013b7f247074e82fd466d533cdc6dcd56
Author: Georg Baum
Date: Mon Apr 13 21:07:05 2015 +0200
Make static variable non-static
This is still a hack, but a less dangerous one. The
On 05/07/2015 06:41 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Am 07.05.2015 um 21:56 schrieb Richard Heck:
Are all the issues about whitespace sorted out?
In the particular module file yes.
That the "requires" statement requires currently spaces was reported
as general bugs affecting all layouts and modules. Jü
Am 07.05.2015 um 21:56 schrieb Richard Heck:
Are all the issues about whitespace sorted out?
In the particular module file yes.
That the "requires" statement requires currently spaces was reported as
general bugs affecting all layouts and modules. Jürgen and JMarc are
working on this. To av
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 4:40 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> If it is a validator, it is really dialogue mechanics.
OK thanks.
Scott
If it is a validator, it is really dialogue mechanics.
JMarc
Le 7 mai 2015 20:33:42 CEST, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> wrote:
>> Le 06/05/2015 05:01, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>>
>>> Do we have a description of our trac components? Several of
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 04/05/2015 18:27, José Matos a écrit :
>> The failures start at the begin, so there is no need to go down to find
>> the culprit.
>>
>> Any idea about what is wrong here?
>
> What happens if you remove the following:
>
> ./../support/strfwd.h:59:59: note: candida
On 05/05/2015 07:48 PM, Uwe Stöhr wrote:
Hi Richard,
I would like to have the pdfform.module in LyX 2.1.4. I work with this
now every day and created several PDF forms. So in my opinion it is
ready for the stable release.
Since we added PDF comment support in LyX 2.1.3 I don't see a reason
On 05/07/2015 02:33 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 06/05/2015 05:01, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Do we have a description of our trac components? Several of the bugs
with 'frontend-qt4' seem better suited to me in the 'dialogs'
component
On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:19 AM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 06/05/2015 05:01, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>>
>> Do we have a description of our trac components? Several of the bugs
>> with 'frontend-qt4' seem better suited to me in the 'dialogs'
>> component. Was the 'dialogs' component created
On 05/07/2015 10:03 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
Am 07.05.2015 um 15:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes :
Le 07/05/2015 15:29, Stephan Witt a écrit :
No, I don't need to measure it. It's a common practice. Perhaps it's not
significant anymore with more computing power inside your notebook than on the
Am 07.05.2015 um 14:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes :
> Le 07/05/2015 14:38, Stephan Witt a écrit :
>>> This looks good. Why do you need the loop in allowSpellCheck to go in
>>> reverse?
>>
>> Because depth() is called only once then. Of course looping forward will
>> produce the same result.
>
Am 07.05.2015 um 15:48 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes :
> Le 07/05/2015 15:29, Stephan Witt a écrit :
>> No, I don't need to measure it. It's a common practice. Perhaps it's not
>> significant anymore with more computing power inside your notebook than on
>> the main frame of my university 15 year
Le 07/05/2015 15:29, Stephan Witt a écrit :
No, I don't need to measure it. It's a common practice. Perhaps it's not
significant anymore with more computing power inside your notebook than on the
main frame of my university 15 years ago.
Except that if this optimization (on a vector of size 1
Le 04/05/2015 18:27, José Matos a écrit :
The failures start at the begin, so there is no need to go down to find the
culprit.
Any idea about what is wrong here?
What happens if you remove the following:
./../support/strfwd.h:59:59: note: candidates are: templateclass Traits, class Allocator
Le 07/05/2015 14:38, Stephan Witt a écrit :
This looks good. Why do you need the loop in allowSpellCheck to go in reverse?
Because depth() is called only once then. Of course looping forward will
produce the same result.
Did you measure the gain? I think this is a case of making the code
(s
Am 07.05.2015 um 14:18 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes :
> Le 07/05/2015 14:13, Stephan Witt a écrit :
>> Ok, you're right. The 2nd test is enough.
>>
>> But I think the logic was not fool proof for math before. A better patch is
>> attached.
>
> I think there are many places where we test explici
Le 05/05/2015 21:58, Georg Baum a écrit :
I suggest a very simple rule which ensures good display for everybody: Use
tabs for logical indentation, and spaces for visula alignment.
Note that Preambles are read with getLongString, which considers the
leading space of the first line as a prefix f
Le 06/05/2015 05:01, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Do we have a description of our trac components? Several of the bugs
with 'frontend-qt4' seem better suited to me in the 'dialogs'
component. Was the 'dialogs' component created after and that's why
many bugs were originally marked 'frontend-qt4' ?
Le 07/05/2015 14:13, Stephan Witt a écrit :
Ok, you're right. The 2nd test is enough.
But I think the logic was not fool proof for math before. A better patch is
attached.
I think there are many places where we test explicitly against mathed
whereas a more semantic test should be done.
Th
Am 07.05.2015 um 07:47 schrieb Stephan Witt :
> Am 06.05.2015 um 22:17 schrieb Jean-Marc Lasgouttes :
>
>> Le 06/05/15 18:40, Stephan Witt a écrit :
>>> // We are only interested in text so remove the math
>>> CursorSlice.
>>> - while (from.inMathed()) {
>>> + //
21 matches
Mail list logo
