On Tue, Oct 06, 2020 at 10:35:50PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> The attached example compiles to different PDF display with master than
> with 2.3.x (notice the difference in spacing between the two lines).
>
> The difference (between 2.3.x and master) goes away if the LyX note is
> removed. Th
On 10/7/20 3:09 PM, Yuriy Skalko wrote:
>> I like that. I have to admit that I gave up checking that the loops were
>> equivalent roughly at the first third of the patch :)
>>
>> Is it done by hand or with some tool?
> I used combination of clang-tidy and hands.
>
>
>> There are also in the Qt par
> I like that. I have to admit that I gave up checking that the loops were
> equivalent roughly at the first third of the patch :)
>
> Is it done by hand or with some tool?
I used combination of clang-tidy and hands.
> There are also in the Qt part things like:
>
> +
On 10/7/20 10:31 AM, Yuriy Skalko wrote:
> And the last patch based on the static analyzers output.
diff --git a/src/Author.cpp b/src/Author.cpp
index 9a2dc1ea43..b4cf9fd97b 100644
--- a/src/Author.cpp
+++ b/src/Author.cpp
@@ -31,8 +31,8 @@ static int computeHash(docstring const & name,
st
Le 07/10/2020 à 16:31, Yuriy Skalko a écrit :
And the last patch based on the static analyzers output.
I like that. I have to admit that I gave up checking that the loops were
equivalent roughly at the first third of the patch :)
Is it done by hand or with some tool?
A few remarks, first on
And the last patch based on the static analyzers output.
Yuriy
From 763c67bba79be0b3d08f7f86b6935bba81e25a9e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuriy Skalko
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 17:27:09 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] Loop refactoring
---
src/Author.cpp | 4 +-
src/Buffer.cpp
> What José said.
>
> Riki
Yes, backward compatibility wins again, even the *man* cannot change that.
Yuriy
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
> It wouldn't be awful, but we do not want to allow assignments to these
> things. That's why that's there, and undefined.
>
> Riki
> Is not your patch like:
>
> InsetTableCell::InsetTableCell(InsetTableCell const & in) = default;
>
> Or I am in the wrong standard?
> --
> José Abílio
If ass
