> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bo> Your solution may be wrong because C-< should not work without
Bo> buffer, but 'bookmark-goto 1/2/3' etc should work without buffer.
Bo> This is why I moved 'bookmark-goto' from BufferView to lfunc.
Since we now know that bookmark 0 is valid w
> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Are you sure that C-< should not work without buffer? Why?
Bo> I am actually not sure. Bookmark 0 is not saved with session so it
Bo> does not exist when lyx starts (reason for C-< crash). If bookmark
Bo> 0 becomes valid later, it should be usab
Are you sure that C-< should not work without buffer? Why?
I am actually not sure. Bookmark 0 is not saved with session so it
does not exist when lyx starts (reason for C-< crash). If bookmark 0
becomes valid later, it should be usable without a valid buffer.
I am not sure because I never use b
> "Bo" == Bo Peng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Bo> Your solution may be wrong because C-< should not work without
Bo> buffer, but 'bookmark-goto 1/2/3' etc should work without buffer.
Are you sure that C-< should not work without buffer? Why?
JMarc
The only part that is really relevant to the bug is that I use an
ASSERT when the bookmark is not valid in BOOKMARK_GOTO. Using "break;"
there is not a good idea, since the problem should never happen.
Maybe I understood the problem wrong. It appears to me that bookmark
will always be valid thro
As I said, it's used if you back from a label to its reference. We have the
shortcut Ctrl-< for this (and C-> for the other way round), so it's not
wrong.
bookmark 0 is used for two internal purposes, and label is one of
them. I now see why it is useful to you.
I will close the ticket.
Bo
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Since it seems that nobody cared that I posted a correct patch for bug
> 3062 on Friday and preferred to use a half-baked one instead, I post
> it again (but with big letters this time) ;-P
oops, sorry, I really seem to have missed that.
Jürgen
Since it seems that nobody cared that I posted a correct patch for bug
3062 on Friday and preferred to use a half-baked one instead, I post
it again (but with big letters this time) ;-P
The only part that is really relevant to the bug is that I use an
ASSERT when the bookmark is not valid in BOOK
Bo Peng wrote:
> First, "bookmark-goto 0" is wrong. Bookmark 0 is for internal use only
> and should not be bounded to any shortcut.
As I said, it's used if you back from a label to its reference. We have the
shortcut Ctrl-< for this (and C-> for the other way round), so it's not
wrong.
But I s
I will submit a patch soon.
Patch submitted, please test. I did not remove 'bookmark-goto 0'
because someone may have some valid use of it, though I am not aware
of any.
Bo
it probably would be better do disable LFUN_BOOKMARKS_GOTO for the temporary
bookmark 0 (label) if it doesn't exist.
First, "bookmark-goto 0" is wrong. Bookmark 0 is for internal use only
and should not be bounded to any shortcut. "bookmark-goto 1" should be
used. Due to the stack nature of book
http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3062
The attached patch avoids the assert reported in this bug. However, it
probably would be better do disable LFUN_BOOKMARKS_GOTO for the temporary
bookmark 0 (label) if it doesn't exist. However, I have no idea how. Bo,
could you have a look?
Jürgen
I
I started to look at bug 3062 (crash when pressing C-<) and found out
seriously weird code in LyXFunc::getStatus. Bo, Peter, I think the
code was yours. Do you see anything wrong with my rewrite? Basically,
when a lfun can work without a buffer one just has to specify the
NoBuffer flag in LyXActio
13 matches
Mail list logo
