On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 11:39:49PM +0100, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 04:23:43PM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > Am Donnerstag, dem 17.11.2022 um 19:21 +0100 schrieb Jean-Marc
> > Lasgouttes:
> > > You're right, I read to fast. So GCC ???11 is ok.
> >
> > I am not sure I unde
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 04:23:43PM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, dem 17.11.2022 um 19:21 +0100 schrieb Jean-Marc
> Lasgouttes:
> > You're right, I read to fast. So GCC ???11 is ok.
>
> I am not sure I understand.
Andre references to Qt bug, which claims that it is underlying g
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 06:14:01PM +, José Matos wrote:
> On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 18:43 +0100, Thibaut Cuvelier wrote:
> > You can avoid this level of indentation by defining the variable
> > within the if:
> >
> > if (const vector potential_terms =
> > getSubentriesAsText(runparams); !potentia
On Fri, 2022-11-18 at 18:43 +0100, Thibaut Cuvelier wrote:
> You can avoid this level of indentation by defining the variable
> within the if:
>
> if (const vector potential_terms =
> getSubentriesAsText(runparams); !potential_terms.empty()) {
>
> I don't really like this syntax, because it make
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 06:43:38PM +0100, Thibaut Cuvelier wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 at 18:41, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> > What do you think of the attached patch? It adds braces to restrict the
> > scope of the variable 'potential_terms'. I like this style, since it
> > makes it easier for m
On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 08:59:27PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 10:04:31PM +0100, Thibaut Cuvelier wrote:
> > On Thu, 3 Nov 2022 at 21:27, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 11:38:46PM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 1
On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 at 18:41, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> What do you think of the attached patch? It adds braces to restrict the
> scope of the variable 'potential_terms'. I like this style, since it
> makes it easier for me to read, but I wonder if others would find it
> annoying. For example, it
What do you think of the attached patch? It adds braces to restrict the
scope of the variable 'potential_terms'. I like this style, since it
makes it easier for me to read, but I wonder if others would find it
annoying. For example, it adds an extra layer of indentation.
Scott
From b442cc74cc6285
Le 18/11/2022 à 18:03, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
What can you do to help?
* have look at the diff in src to spot what I broke
* and look at KILLQT4 annotations to see whethe rsome of them are in your
ballpark
* look for things to do in TODO.killqt4
I think this was meant for Jürgen, but to be c
On Fri, Nov 18, 2022 at 05:33:43PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Le 17/11/2022 à 07:34, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit :
> > Am Mittwoch, dem 16.11.2022 um 11:11 -0500 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> > > Does anyone object then to supporting only Qt5 for
> > > 2.4.0 (and forward)?
> >
> > No. I thin
Le 17/11/2022 à 07:34, Jürgen Spitzmüller a écrit :
Am Mittwoch, dem 16.11.2022 um 11:11 -0500 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
Does anyone object then to supporting only Qt5 for
2.4.0 (and forward)?
No. I think now is the time to do it.
I created a new branch killqt4 that removes #ifdefs in src and
Am Donnerstag, dem 17.11.2022 um 19:21 +0100 schrieb Jean-Marc
Lasgouttes:
> You're right, I read to fast. So GCC ≥11 is ok.
I am not sure I understand. I have gcc 12.2.1 and see the crash.
--
Jürgen
--
lyx-devel mailing list
lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org
http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-dev
12 matches
Mail list logo
