On Thu, Sep 14, 2006 at 10:28:39AM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> > struct A { };
> > void operator+=(A &, int) {}
> > int main() { A a; a += 1; }
> >
> > should compile just fine.
>
> Then you can explain to me why operator+= is a class member of std:string? I
> don't want to add an out-of-class ope
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 08:57:13AM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
>> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>>
>> > You should probably do operator+= as well. But I am not sure if that
>> > is possible as a out-of-class operator.
>>
>> It is not, otherwise I would have done it. We can of co
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 08:57:13AM +0200, Georg Baum wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> > You should probably do operator+= as well. But I am not sure if that
> > is possible as a out-of-class operator.
>
> It is not, otherwise I would have done it. We can of course make docstring a
> subcla
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 10:28:37PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> | > Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
> |
> | That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
> |
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 11:17:02PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb:
> | > I don't want one man that is unwilling to work on qt3 decide what
> | > happens with it. Get consensus, then let's ditch it. Not before.
> | >
>
On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 10:58:19PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Georg Baum schrieb:
> | > Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> | >
> | >> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
> | >>
> | > That is not possib
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdel wanted qt4 because mingw is too slow.
Abdelrazak> Man, you are rewriting history ;-)
I thought you stated it again recently. Since I am too lazy to search
the archives, I'll just retract the argu
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Abdel wanted qt4 because mingw is too slow.
Abdelrazak> Man, you are rewriting history ;-)
I thought you stated it again recently. Since I am too lazy to search
the archives, I'll just retract the argument :)
Abdelrazak> For
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Note however that this qt4 frenzy is just an historical accident:
That part is true.
Abdel wanted qt4 because mingw is too slow.
Man, you are rewriting history ;-)
For the record. I started with mingw and stayed with it a long time
until Bo provided scons. Min
> "Michael" == Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Michael> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schrieb:
>> This notion that change is always progress is pure bullshit.
Michael> I agree with you to some degree. However,
Michael> - there is some evidence that qt4 is superior to qt3 (at
Michael> least so
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes schrieb:
This notion that change is always progress is pure bullshit.
I agree with you to some degree. However,
- there is some evidence that qt4 is superior to qt3 (at least some
people think so)
- development has already shifted from qt3 to qt4 and IMHO this shift
is ir
Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Smart trick. By the way, what will happen to LyX .po files?
| Will they now move to UTF-8, or perhaps some other unicode encoding?
| (I mean the translated strings, obviously.)
As it is now, that is not really necessary, we use
bind_textdomain_codeset
On Mon, Sep 11, 2006 at 05:01:24PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | But what if I want to translate some unicode (usc4) string? That's the
> | > | case i
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> | > The only thing that scares me is what is the _next_ thing that will be
> | > on the chopping block. Ispell and gtk are a no-brainer; but then? When
> | > heads begin to roll, the people de
Peter Kümmel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
| > The only thing that scares me is what is the _next_ thing that will be
| > on the chopping block. Ispell and gtk are a no-brainer; but then? When
| > heads begin to roll, the people demands more blood ;-)
|
| Here an idea:
> "Edwin" == Leuven, E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> And then the _next_ day (or even the same days), it was "what? we
>> are in 2006 and we still have qt3? Etc etc".
Edwin> as i remember it the argument was that we don't want to
Edwin> duplicate or triplicate effort on the frontend side
Th
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Edwin" == Leuven, E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
What bothers me is rather the following: for some weeks we had people
clamoring "what? we are in 2006 and we still have xforms? Do you know
all the things we could be doing if we did not have it? how can LyX
continue t
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> The only thing that scares me is what is the _next_ thing that will be
> on the chopping block. Ispell and gtk are a no-brainer; but then? When
> heads begin to roll, the people demands more blood ;-)
Here an idea: ;)
Linking against Qt4Core is allowed for all libs.
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Edwin> 1. profound suspicion of, and resistance to change
>
> I am perfectly aware that this is my case, but I refuse to cure it,
> because I think some negative feedback is always useful in a control
> loop.
whom are you telling? ;-)
> Edwin> 2. all change must h
Leuven, E. wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> You can revert that and say that those who want to get rid of qt3
>> because they will feel more comfortable will be morally engaged to do
>> whatever is needed to make lyx run and be packaged on all the
>> not-so-old linux distribs. This means
> "Edwin" == Leuven, E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edwin> atm this seems to sum it up on linux for the major distros:
Edwin> * Arch Linux (4.1.4) * Debian Etch (testing) 4.1.3 (some
Edwin> 4.1.2) * Debian Sid (unstable) 4.1.3 * Fedora 4 4.1.4 * Fedora
Edwin> 5 4.1.4 * Red Hat 9 4.1.4 * Re
> "Abdelrazak" == Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Abdelrazak> Many users are contributing packages right?
No, some users are contributing packages sometime. I am not
criticizing those people, but we lack proper synchronization and it is
going to get work. I am personally not goi
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> You can revert that and say that those who want to get rid of qt3
> because they will feel more comfortable will be morally engaged to do
> whatever is needed to make lyx run and be packaged on all the
> not-so-old linux distribs. This means _good_ packaging of bina
Helge Hafting <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | But what if I want to translate some unicode (usc4) string? That's the
| > | case in a couple of place in the code and that's the reason I added
| > | this method.
|
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
"Edwin" == Leuven, E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edwin> and, is prepared to take up the work of keeping it up-to-date
Edwin> ...
Edwin> (remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch)
You can revert that and say that those who want to get rid of qt3
because the
> "Edwin" == Leuven, E <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Edwin> and, is prepared to take up the work of keeping it up-to-date
Edwin> ...
Edwin> (remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch)
You can revert that and say that those who want to get rid of qt3
because they will feel more comforta
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Georg Baum wrote:
>> Helge Hafting wrote:
>>
>>> Removing it is no problem for me, compiling qt4 works for me,
>>> and I have the impression that the scrolling performance
>>> problems (compared to qt3) were fixed.
>>
>> The last time I checked before the unicode merge
Georg Baum wrote:
Helge Hafting wrote:
Removing it is no problem for me, compiling qt4 works for me,
and I have the impression that the scrolling performance
problems (compared to qt3) were fixed.
The last time I checked before the unicode merge they where not fixed.
AFAIR, the problem was
Helge Hafting wrote:
> Removing it is no problem for me, compiling qt4 works for me,
> and I have the impression that the scrolling performance
> problems (compared to qt3) were fixed.
The last time I checked before the unicode merge they where not fixed.
Currently this can't be checked because l
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| But what if I want to translate some unicode (usc4) string? That's the
| case in a couple of place in the code and that's the reason I added
| this method.
That is just not allowed. Msgid is only allowed to be pure ascii
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb:
| > I don't want one man that is unwilling to work on qt3 decide what
| > happens with it. Get consensus, then let's ditch it. Not before.
| >
| OK, then let's revert the question: Who wants to kee
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
| > I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
| > - bformat()
| > - Alert::XXX
| > - error()
| > - message()
| > - displayMessage()
| > - ErrorItems
| > - etc...
| >
|
| OK, here's the ne
Michael Gerz wrote:
> ... hmmm ... didn't we want to drop qt3???
The patch will also be useful elsewhere.
Georg
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> You should probably do operator+= as well. But I am not sure if that
> is possible as a out-of-class operator.
It is not, otherwise I would have done it. We can of course make docstring a
subclass of std::basic_string and add it ourselves, but
then we need to forward
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
| > I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
| > - bformat()
| > - Alert::XXX
| > - error()
| > - message()
| > - displayMessage()
| > - ErrorItems
| > - etc...
| >
|
| OK, here's the new patch, including Georg' bfo
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Georg Baum wrote:
| > Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
| >> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
| > That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
| > BTW qt3 does not compile
> Or. Who is unconfortable wrt removing qt3 from the repository?
and, is prepared to take up the work of keeping it up-to-date
...
(remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch)
> I don't want one man that is unwilling to work on qt3 decide what
> happens with it. Get consensus, then let's ditch it. Not before.
i hate repeating myself, but i would get rid of it
one frontend is more than enough work and qt4 is the only eligible candidate
i think that qt3
1. either shoul
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb:
| > I don't want one man that is unwilling to work on qt3 decide what
| > happens with it. Get consensus, then let's ditch it. Not before.
| >
| OK, then let's revert the question: Who wants to keep qt3?
Or. Who is unconforta
Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb:
I don't want one man that is unwilling to work on qt3 decide what
happens with it. Get consensus, then let's ditch it. Not before.
OK, then let's revert the question: Who wants to keep qt3?
Michael
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Georg Baum wrote:
| > Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
| >> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
| > That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
| > BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch.
|
| I did
Lars Gullik Bjønnes schrieb:
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Georg Baum schrieb:
| > Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
| >
| >> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
| >>
| > That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
| >
| > BTW qt3 does
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
I noticed ;-)
I am doing the extra work right now... pfiou...
Abdel.
Michael Gerz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Georg Baum schrieb:
| > Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
| >
| >> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
| >>
| > That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
| >
| > BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch. I
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch.
I did not even test it... nor do I can.
Quite frankly, there is more
Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
| > Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
|
| That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
|
| BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch. I think we don't want to plaster
| the
Georg Baum schrieb:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch. I think we don't want to plaster
the sources with lyx::char_t
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
| > | | - bformat()
| > | - Alert::XXX
| > | - error()
| > | - message()
| > | - displayMessage()
| > | - ErrorItems
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:25 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> Let's do this cleanup in the next round then.
That is not possible if you use my bformat version.
BTW qt3 does not compile with your patch. I think we don't want to plaster
the sources with lyx::char_type('|'), but use the attache
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:15 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
The last thing is the addition of
docstring _(docstring const &)
that is no good. The _() function is _required_ to only accept ascii
input. Not even utf8 is accepted. (Please drop th
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:15 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > The last thing is the addition of
> >
> > docstring _(docstring const &)
> >
> > that is no good. The _() function is _required_ to only accept ascii
> > input. Not even utf8 is accepted. (Please dro
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:23 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> I have to admit I did not read closely the boost::format documentation.
> I'll update my patch with yours then if that's OK for you.
Sure.
Georg
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:11 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Yes I figured that you indeed. But I just converted arg1 to std::string
instead.
We don't want that I think. bformat should not mix std::string and
docstring IMHO.
I think the same but I was not sure.
Let's
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 20:10 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
Here is the updated patch. Objection?
None apart from what Lars already mentioned, but the back and forth
conversions in bformat can be avoided if you use the attached patch
(against clean lstrings.[Ch]). You m
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 21:11 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> Yes I figured that you indeed. But I just converted arg1 to std::string
> instead.
We don't want that I think. bformat should not mix std::string and
docstring IMHO.
Georg
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
|
| - bformat()
| - Alert::XXX
| - error()
| - message()
| - displayMessage()
| - ErrorItems
| - etc...
Great work.
Thanks. That was pretty exhausting...
But you s
Peter Kümmel wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
- bformat()
- Alert::XXX
- error()
- message()
- displayMessage()
- ErrorItems
- etc...
This patch compiles (qt4) but I have a link error (below). If someone
(Georg?) have an idea, please help me. Th
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 20:10 schrieb Abdelrazak Younes:
> Here is the updated patch. Objection?
None apart from what Lars already mentioned, but the back and forth
conversions in bformat can be avoided if you use the attached patch
(against clean lstrings.[Ch]). You might need to add mor
Georg Baum wrote:
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 20:28 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
Also I expect the changes to gtk to not compile. I doubt that
locale_to_utf8 takes a docstring parameter.
locale_to_utf8 should be replaced by lyx::to_utf8 if the argument becomes a
docstring.
Abdel, if you
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
>
> - bformat()
> - Alert::XXX
> - error()
> - message()
> - displayMessage()
> - ErrorItems
> - etc...
>
> This patch compiles (qt4) but I have a link error (below). If someone
> (Georg?) have an idea, please help me. T
Am Sonntag, 10. September 2006 20:28 schrieb Lars Gullik Bjønnes:
> Also I expect the changes to gtk to not compile. I doubt that
> locale_to_utf8 takes a docstring parameter.
locale_to_utf8 should be replaced by lyx::to_utf8 if the argument becomes a
docstring.
Abdel, if you don't know what thi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Lars Gullik Bjønnes) writes:
| Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| | I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
| |
| | - bformat()
| | - Alert::XXX
| | - error()
| | - message()
| | - displayMessage()
| | - ErrorItems
| | - etc...
|
| Great work.
|
| Bu
Abdelrazak Younes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I've done a lot of conversion to docstring today.
|
| - bformat()
| - Alert::XXX
| - error()
| - message()
| - displayMessage()
| - ErrorItems
| - etc...
Great work.
But you seems to have worked in an unclean tree, there is som
unrelated spellchec
63 matches
Mail list logo
