On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 9:09 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> Am 02.10.2012 um 12:39 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>
>> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>>> Am 02.10.2012 um 11:44 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>>>
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
wrote:
> Sco
Am 02.10.2012 um 12:39 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
>> Am 02.10.2012 um 11:44 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
>>> wrote:
Scott Kostyshak writes:
| On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:
On Tue, Oct 2, 2012 at 5:54 AM, Stephan Witt wrote:
> Am 02.10.2012 um 11:44 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
>
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
>> wrote:
>>> Scott Kostyshak writes:
>>>
>>> | On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>>
>>> | From 35dcd7f6fb88a47
Am 02.10.2012 um 11:44 schrieb Scott Kostyshak :
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Scott Kostyshak writes:
>>
>> | On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>
>> | From 35dcd7f6fb88a47bda9342e53d528cb521f34505 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>> | From: Sc
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 3:51 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Scott Kostyshak writes:
>
> | On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Julien Rioux
>>> wrote:
On 27/09/2012 7:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>
> - ::write(
Scott Kostyshak writes:
| On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Julien Rioux
>> wrote:
>>> On 27/09/2012 7:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
- ::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length());
+if (::write(
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Julien Rioux
> wrote:
>> On 27/09/2012 7:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>>
>>> - ::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length());
>>> +if (::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length())
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Julien Rioux
wrote:
> On 27/09/2012 7:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>
>> - ::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length());
>> +if (::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length()) < 0)
>> +LYXERR0("Cannot write to pipe!"
On 27/09/2012 7:17 AM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
- ::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length());
+if (::write(pipefd, cmd.c_str(), cmd.length()) < 0)
+LYXERR0("Cannot write to pipe!");
You're space-indenting in a tab-indented file here.
--
Julie
Le 27/09/2012 13:17, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
OK. I'm trying to stay away from branch as much as possible for now.
But attached are the three patches. Can someone check them and make
sure they are risk free?
They seem OK to me. I am not sure what the lexer code does, but the
patch does not ch
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 09/23/2012 04:54 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>>
>> Le 23/09/12 00:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
How many users *compile* anything :)
>>>
>>>
>>> True. And out of those who do, how many look at the warnings? :)
>>
>>
>> Persona
On 09/23/2012 04:54 PM, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Le 23/09/12 00:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
How many users *compile* anything :)
True. And out of those who do, how many look at the warnings? :)
Personally, I still think that removing warnings in branch matters.
Yes, I think it's worth
Le 23/09/12 00:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
How many users *compile* anything :)
True. And out of those who do, how many look at the warnings? :)
Personally, I still think that removing warnings in branch matters.
JMarc
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
>> Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>> not worth it worrying about the warnings because they are not harmful
>>> and that by trying to fix them, something could go wrong. The reason I
>>
>> That *
On Sat, Sep 22, 2012 at 5:47 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> not worth it worrying about the warnings because they are not harmful
>> and that by trying to fix them, something could go wrong. The reason I
>
> That *something could go wrong* is critical. Removing unused variable
Scott Kostyshak wrote:
> not worth it worrying about the warnings because they are not harmful
> and that by trying to fix them, something could go wrong. The reason I
That *something could go wrong* is critical. Removing unused variable
or a function is not problem, but changing function calls li
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> | diff --git a/src/Server.cpp b/src/Server.cpp
>> | index 7ec096e..b4a0d11 100644
>> | --- a/src/Server.cpp
>> | +++ b/src/Server.cpp
>> | @@ -1010,12 +1010,16 @@ bool LyXComm::loadFilesInOtherInstance()
>> |
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Pavel Sanda wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
>> | diff --git a/src/Server.cpp b/src/Server.cpp
>> | index 7ec096e..b4a0d11 100644
>> | --- a/src/Server.cpp
>> | +++ b/src/Server.cpp
>> | @@ -1010,12 +1010,16 @@ bool LyXComm::loadFilesInOtherInstance()
>> |
On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 3:54 AM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Scott Kostyshak writes:
>
> | On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
> wrote:
>>> btw. std::string::c_str() should not be used here,
>>> use std::string::data() instead.
>>
> | Lars, can you confirm that I made the rig
Lars Gullik Bj?nnes wrote:
> | diff --git a/src/Server.cpp b/src/Server.cpp
> | index 7ec096e..b4a0d11 100644
> | --- a/src/Server.cpp
> | +++ b/src/Server.cpp
> | @@ -1010,12 +1010,16 @@ bool LyXComm::loadFilesInOtherInstance()
> | // Wait a while to allow time for the other
> |
Scott Kostyshak writes:
| On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes
wrote:
>> btw. std::string::c_str() should not be used here,
>> use std::string::data() instead.
>
| Lars, can you confirm that I made the right corrections? I changed
| c_str() to data() in two places. If they are
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> btw. std::string::c_str() should not be used here,
> use std::string::data() instead.
Lars, can you confirm that I made the right corrections? I changed
c_str() to data() in two places. If they are right I will also make
these changes
All this looks fine to me once Lars's comments are handled.
rh
On 09/20/2012 05:49 PM, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Scott Kostyshak writes:
| On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
This patch for branch fixes a warning that was fixed on master here:
ea50cd71f9d
Is it OK?
S
Scott Kostyshak writes:
| On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>>> This patch for branch fixes a warning that was fixed on master here:
>>> ea50cd71f9d
>>>
>>> Is it OK?
>>>
>>> Scott
>>
>> This updated patch fixes another warning on branch, which was also
>> fixed in master a
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote:
>> This patch for branch fixes a warning that was fixed on master here:
>> ea50cd71f9d
>>
>> Is it OK?
>>
>> Scott
>
> This updated patch fixes another warning on branch, which was also
> fixed in master at that commit.
>
> Scott
Sorry for t
> This patch for branch fixes a warning that was fixed on master here:
> ea50cd71f9d
>
> Is it OK?
>
> Scott
This updated patch fixes another warning on branch, which was also
fixed in master at that commit.
Scott
diff --git a/src/Lexer.cpp b/src/Lexer.cpp
index d824da0..664e1b9 100644
--- a/src/
This patch for branch fixes a warning that was fixed on master here:
ea50cd71f9d
Is it OK?
Scott
diff --git a/src/frontends/qt4/GuiSpellchecker.cpp
b/src/frontends/qt4/GuiSpellchecker.cpp
index 5dbdbbb..c428807 100644
--- a/src/frontends/qt4/GuiSpellchecker.cpp
+++ b/src/frontends/qt4/GuiSpellch
27 matches
Mail list logo
