Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-10 Thread Kuba Ober
> And all those extra member functions could just as well be separate > functions. > > It seems that even the std::string is now considered too fat. Most of > what it does is possible to implement outside of the class. > > So I am not argueing against functions that operate on strings. I am > argue

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-10 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On czwartek 09 grudzień 2004 10:42 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Are you sure of this. I know that the std::string in libstdc++ has >> >> gotten quite a bit of performance tweaks lately. >> >> (gcc 3.4.x and

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-09 Thread Kuba Ober
On czwartek 09 grudzieÅ 2004 10:42 am, Lars Gullik BjÃnnes wrote: > Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Are you sure of this. I know that the std::string in libstdc++ has > >> gotten quite a bit of performance tweaks lately. > >> (gcc 3.4.x and 4.x) > | > | So they finally play catch up with

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-09 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Are you sure of this. I know that the std::string in libstdc++ has >> gotten quite a bit of performance tweaks lately. >> (gcc 3.4.x and 4.x) > | So they finally play catch up with Qt. Nice :) > | Even then, it's essentially just a dumb container. You'd exp

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-09 Thread Kuba Ober
> And I certainly don't think the Trolltech implementation will outperform > either gcc's or VC++'s implementation. Performance is not exactly a > highly visible target in Qt development... I don't think it will outperform, but it should be on par with. It's really not rocket science, at least th

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-12-09 Thread Kuba Ober
> Are you sure of this. I know that the std::string in libstdc++ has > gotten quite a bit of performance tweaks lately. > (gcc 3.4.x and 4.x) So they finally play catch up with Qt. Nice :) Even then, it's essentially just a dumb container. You'd expect something more of a useful string implement

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-27 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Wed, Nov 24, 2004 at 05:05:00PM -0500, Kuba Ober wrote: > > Right now they are re-inventing STL. It's called 'Tulip'. The nice > > thing that I can see so far is that one does not have to use it. > > I don't think this is such a bad idea. Even if you think about performance > only. E.g. if you

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-24 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Kuba Ober <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On poniedziałek 22 listopad 2004 05:58 am, Andre Poenitz wrote: >> On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:12:05AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> > >> | + v->setBottom(glen); >> > >> | + return v; >> > >> | +} >> > >> >> > >> I really dont' like these returning p

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-24 Thread Kuba Ober
On poniedziaÅek 22 listopad 2004 05:58 am, Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:12:05AM +0100, Lars Gullik BjÃnnes wrote: > > >> | + v->setBottom(glen); > > >> | + return v; > > >> | +} > > >> > > >> I really dont' like these returning pointers. > > | > > | This is 'best Qt practice'.

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:12:05AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> | +v->setBottom(glen); > >> | +return v; > >> | +} > >> > >> I really dont' like these returning pointers. > > > | This is 'best Qt practice'. The pointees life time is taken care of by > | its parent, and th

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 10:32:18AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > > LyXLength len; > > Shouldn't len be (explicitely) initialized? It's default constructed. If the result is different from LyXLength len = LyXLength() the copy constructor has extremely unusual behaviour. Andre'

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > I can live with this. committed. Jürgen

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Partially changed patch attached. I can live with this. -- Lgb

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | Index: QExternalDialog.C > | === > | RCS file: > | /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/frontends/qt2/QExternalDialog.C,v > | retrieving revision 1.22 > | diff -p -u -r1.22 QExternalDialog.C > | --- QExte

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 09:24:41AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> | - v->setBottom(LyXLength()); >> | + LyXLength len = LyXLength(); >> >> LyXLength len; > | v->setBottom(LyXLength()) is just fine. > >> | + v->setBottom(glen); >> | + return v;

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 08:50:52AM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > I think I saw some code similar to > > > >    void foo(LyXLength len); > > > > This should be > > > >    void foo(LyXLength const & len); > > Corrected in the attached patch. I will commit this if I he

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Andre Poenitz wrote: >> I think I saw some code similar to >> >>    void foo(LyXLength len); >> >> This should be >> >>    void foo(LyXLength const & len); > | Corrected in the attached patch. I will commit this if I hear no more | objections. >

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-22 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
Andre Poenitz wrote: > I think I saw some code similar to > >    void foo(LyXLength len); > > This should be > >    void foo(LyXLength const & len); Corrected in the attached patch. I will commit this if I hear no more objections. Jürgen Index: QExternalDialog.C =

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-21 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 01:23:54PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > Comments? > > > > LyX[Glue]Length arguments should be passed by reference. > > I don't understand. I think I saw some code similar to void foo(LyXLength len); This should be void foo(LyXLen

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-21 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
Alfredo Braunstein wrote: > I think that he means just to replace > boolÂLengthValidator::setBottom(LyXGlueLengthÂg) > by > boolÂLengthValidator::setBottom(LyXGlueLengthÂconst & g) > and so on, whenever possible. I see. OK, I'll change this. Regards, JÃrgen > Regards, Alfredo

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-21 Thread Alfredo Braunstein
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: >> LyX[Glue]Length arguments should be passed by reference. > > I don't understand. Hi Juergen, I think that he means just to replace boolÂLengthValidator::setBottom(LyXGlueLengthÂg) by boolÂLengthValidator::setBottom(LyXGlueLengthÂconst & g) and so on, whenever

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-21 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
Andre Poenitz wrote: > > Comments? > > LyX[Glue]Length arguments should be passed by reference. I don't understand. Jürgen

Re: [patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-20 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Fri, Nov 19, 2004 at 03:09:34PM +0100, Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > The attached patch adds a glue length validator to qt/lengthvalidator > and uses it in QVSpace (this is related to bug . More dialogs to > come. > > Comments? LyX[Glue]Length arguments should be passed by reference. Andre'

[patch] qt gluelength validator

2004-11-19 Thread Juergen Spitzmueller
The attached patch adds a glue length validator to qt/lengthvalidator and uses it in QVSpace (this is related to bug . More dialogs to come. Comments? Jürgen Index: QVSpace.C === RCS file: /usr/local/lyx/cvsroot/lyx-devel/src/fronte