Le 29 sept. 08 à 20:26, Andre Poenitz a écrit :
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:12:31AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
That would be the setSelection() overload without arguments, no?
You are right indeed.
But having the overload is a bit misleading.
On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 10:12:31AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > That would be the setSelection() overload without arguments, no?
>
> You are right indeed.
But having the overload is a bit misleading. Separating it into two
functions or renamin
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That would be the setSelection() overload without arguments, no?
You are right indeed.
JMarc
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 09:44:10AM +0200, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > Author: poenitz
> > Date: Wed Sep 24 23:27:41 2008
> > New Revision: 26527
> >
> > URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/26527
> > Log:
> > streamlining setter syntax. using mutable references
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Author: poenitz
> Date: Wed Sep 24 23:27:41 2008
> New Revision: 26527
>
> URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/26527
> Log:
> streamlining setter syntax. using mutable references seems a bit
> outlandish compared to the rest of LyX
> - d->cursor_.selection() = f
