Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> So, what would be the best solution?
Remove inInset altogether of course! ;-)
I tried to do that once and failed miserably...
Alfredo
> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Georg> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Do you know when this can happen?
Georg> For example with the attached document.
>> I also thought it was not necessary.
Georg> If inInset is supposed to return always a valid pointer we
Georg> should
Georg Baum wrote:
> If inInset is supposed to return always a valid pointer we should
> assert in inInset and remove checks at other places. But then I
> wonder what is wrong with the current code?
If inInset is supposed to return always a valid pointer, it should
return a reference...
--
Angus
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Do you know when this can happen?
For example with the attached document.
> I also thought it was not necessary.
If inInset is supposed to return always a valid pointer we should assert in
inInset and remove checks at other places. But then I wonder what is wrong
> "Georg" == Georg Baum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Georg> Unfortunately I get a segmentation fault now. The problem is
Georg> that Paragraph::inInset() may return 0. The attached patch
Georg> fixes that. It is going in right now because it is obviously
Georg> the right fix.
Do you know when
Georg Baum wrote:
> Unfortunately I get a segmentation fault now. The problem is that
> Paragraph::inInset() may return 0.
> The attached patch fixes that. It is going in right now because it is
> obviously the right fix.
Thanks,
Jürgen
(actually I originally had the check for inInset())
Am Samstag, 10. September 2005 09:06 schrieb Juergen Spitzmueller:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > Please commit, but with a stronger comment (with a FIXME or a
> > #warning) in InsetText::neverIndent explaining that this is a hack and
> > that cells should have their own InsetCell type.
>
> Don
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Juergen> Yes, but then I'd prefer the attached (which works as well).
>
> Excellent! I missed the fact that text_ is available in an insettext
> (although I read this header file several times, loo
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Yes, but then I'd prefer the attached (which works as well).
Excellent! I missed the fact that text_ is available in an insettext
(although I read this header file several times, looking for a useful
entry).
Please comm
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> So the test only works by chance, because a tabular cell is the only
> insettext that is not subclassed, right?
Let's say the test "sort of" works. I think the reason for bug 1952 is that
isMainText() returns true _inside_ a tabular cell after undo. I don't know
wh
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Concerning this
>>
>> + // there's obviously no better way to omit indendation
>> in tabular cells :-( + && (par.ownerCode() !=
>> InsetBase::TEXT_CODE || isMainText())
Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Read: I did not find any other way.
>
> Your original statement reads as: Obviously, you complete idiot, this
> is the best possible way to omit indentation in tabular cells.
>
> Jean-Marc's suggestion reads as: There may be a better way to do this,
> but I couldn't find it
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
>> // there's obviously no better way to omit indendation
>> // in tabular cells :-(
>> Do you mean "there is no obvious better way"?
> Read: I did not find any other way.
Your original statement reads as: Obviously, you complete idiot, this
is the best possible way t
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Concerning this
>
> + // there's obviously no better way to omit indendation in
> tabular cells :-( + && (par.ownerCode() != InsetBase::TEXT_CODE
> || isMainText())
>
> Do you mean "there is no obvious better way"?
Read: *I* did not find any other
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
>> > But I might be in favour.
>>
>> I'll have a look.
Juergen> Here is the patch. Works like a charme, except for
Juergen> insettabular. I did not find a way to let the tabular cell's
Juerge
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> > But I might be in favour.
>
> I'll have a look.
Here is the patch. Works like a charme, except for insettabular. I did not
find a way to let the tabular cell's (or their insettexts, for that matter)
return neverIndent() true, so I left the (par.ownerCode() !=
Ins
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | So I'm awaiting Lars' comment before going further.
>
> Is this a regression or not?
No, not as far as the indendation of optargs is concerned. On the other hand
it might be that bug 1952 (which is a regression) can be fixed by the "sane"
approach.
> Andre is afra
Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Juergen> OK to apply?
>>
>> As Andre pointed out, adding a virtual method to InsetBase looks like
>> a better (and safe) solution, if Lars agrees with this.
>
| So I'm awaiting Lars' comment before going further.
Is
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Juergen> OK to apply?
>
> As Andre pointed out, adding a virtual method to InsetBase looks like
> a better (and safe) solution, if Lars agrees with this.
So I'm awaiting Lars' comment before going further.
Jürgen
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2003 Do not indent
Juergen> optarg insets. The fix is trivial. For the future, we might
Juergen> consider a bool neverindent in InsetBase rather than putting
Juergen> each inset to
On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 02:56:57PM +0200, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2003
>
> Do not indent optarg insets. The fix is trivial. For the future, we might
> consider a bool neverindent in InsetBase rather than putting each inset to
> the if-clause.
No, th
http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2003
Do not indent optarg insets. The fix is trivial. For the future, we might
consider a bool neverindent in InsetBase rather than putting each inset to
the if-clause.
OK to apply?
Jürgen
Index: src/text.C
===
22 matches
Mail list logo
