On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 03:20:19PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> >> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >>
> >> | Duplicated and/or dead code.
> >>
> >> I do not a
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 12:46:36PM +0100, John Levon wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:44:49PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > Duplicated and/or dead code.
>
> Have you given this some *proper* testing with undo ?
Of course not.
But from a first glance it did not crash more often with this
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:56:41PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> But from a first glance it did not crash more often with this change
> than without...
>
> Ok I'll split it into two and let you play around with the LyXFunc.C
> part...
I'd rather know what this code is supposed to do.
regard
Duplicated and/or dead code.
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...)
? 1.diff
Index: lyxfunc.C
===
RCS fi
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 01:44:49PM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Duplicated and/or dead code.
Have you given this some *proper* testing with undo ? In particular in
various positions of tables etc. ?
john
On Thu, Aug 07, 2003 at 02:04:18PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Duplicated and/or dead code.
>
> I do not agree with how you remove the else
It's still in now.
> it is not longer obvious that the cases are exclusive... I have to
> read each
