On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 01:02:56PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> "Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | I agree that this is not needed as
> | workaround, but this melt feature
> | is useful in itself (1.4.1?)
>
> Possibly. But should we then also handle "delete" at end o
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
I agree that this is not needed as
workaround, but this melt feature
is useful in itself (1.4.1?)
Definitely! I am anxious to see 1.4.1 :-)
Michael
"Jean-Marc Lasgouttes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I agree that this is not needed as
| workaround, but this melt feature
| is useful in itself (1.4.1?)
Possibly. But should we then also handle "delete" at end of inset?
Or have a separate LFUN for this as we had earlier (btw. I do like the
na
I agree that this is not needed as
workaround, but this melt feature
is useful in itself (1.4.1?)
JMarc
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The attached is a proposed workaround for the remaining speed problem
| within insets. I would of course prefer a real solution, but it looks
| from my attempt to write one that it would be very complicated to do
| properly, requiring architectural chan
The attached is a proposed workaround for the remaining speed problem
within insets. I would of course prefer a real solution, but it looks
from my attempt to write one that it would be very complicated to do
properly, requiring architectural changes that are not wise to make at
this point of the
