Georg Baum wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
I don't have time to read the patch, but this goes definitely into the right
direction. Since I was thinking to do the very
On Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 04:26:31AM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> [...]
> >By the way Richard, I always forget to ask you but... could you please
> >add some 'air' in your replies? Adding some empty lines eases the
> >reading...
> will do.
> >
*grin*
I guess you'll need a second attempt ;-)
Andr
Richard Heck wrote:
>
> The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
> InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
I don't have time to read the patch, but this goes definitely into the right
direction. Since I was thinking to do the very same thing some time a
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Richard Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hum, if these are command strings you should not use to_utf8() but
to_ascii().
ok.
Note that the only difference is an assertion if the string is not
ascii. You must therefore be sure that the user can never
Richard Heck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Hum, if these are command strings you should not use to_utf8() but
>> to_ascii().
> ok.
Note that the only difference is an assertion if the string is not
ascii. You must therefore be sure that the user can never make this
assumption false.
JMarc
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
Looks obviously good ;-)
Next step is to remove the InsetCommandMailer...
That's a different project
rh
--
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
This sort of change gives me a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling. It's obvious
you'
Richard Heck wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
This sort of change gives me a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling. It's obvious
you've done something right wh
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
Looks obviously good ;-)
Next step is to remove the InsetCommandMailer...
Abdel.
Angus Leeming wrote:
Richard Heck wrote:
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
This sort of change gives me a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling. It's obvious
you've done something right when you can remove so
Richard Heck wrote:
>
> The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
> InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
>
> Richard
This sort of change gives me a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling. It's obvious
you've done something right when you can remove so much code :
The attached patch finishes this bit of work, left over from the
InsetCommand conversion. Comments welcome before I commit.
Richard
--
==
Richard G Heck, Jr
Professor of Philosophy
Brown University
http://frege.brown.edu/heck/
==
12 matches
Mail list logo