Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Angus Leeming
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: >> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Angus> I'm not going to apply this as-is, because I haven't tested > it. Angus> I guess that it also needs "word-find" and "word-replace" > Angus> addtions to LyXAction.C. > > Angus> Nonetheless, I hope i

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 03:25:29PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > I found ten minutes to move the code around, so the lyx::find stuff is > now in lyxfind.[Ch] in my tree. Which dispatch function should I put > these into? Logically, LyXText::dispatch(). However, I am not sure this will work for

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Angus> I'm not going to apply this as-is, because I haven't tested it. Angus> I guess that it also needs "word-find" and "word-replace" Angus> addtions to LyXAction.C. Angus> Nonetheless, I hope it makes your life easier... + // da

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Angus Leeming
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:55:27PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: >> Andre Poenitz wrote: >> >> > Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? >> >> >> >> None. I have a half-baked patch (attached) that adds the lfuns. >> >> At the moment they are still handled in

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:55:27PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > >> > Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? > >> > >> None. I have a half-baked patch (attached) that adds the lfuns. At > >> the moment they are still handled in > >> frontends/controllers/C

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Angus Leeming
Andre Poenitz wrote: >> > Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? >> >> None. I have a half-baked patch (attached) that adds the lfuns. At >> the moment they are still handled in >> frontends/controllers/ControlSearch.C but it's probably trivial to >> move them to a more appropri

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 01:57:18PM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:46:56PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote: > >> > >> This makes the logic a bit clearer IMO > > > > Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? > > None. I have a half-

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Angus Leeming
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:46:56PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote: >> >> This makes the logic a bit clearer IMO > > Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? None. I have a half-baked patch (attached) that adds the lfuns. At the moment they are still handled

Re: [patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 02:46:56PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote: > > This makes the logic a bit clearer IMO Is there a particular reason why s&r is not LFUN-inified? Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T.

[patch] lyxfind

2004-01-07 Thread Andre Poenitz
This makes the logic a bit clearer IMO Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...) Index: lyxfind.C === RCS f