On czwartek 19 grudzień 2002 10:29 am, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Thursday 19 December 2002 12:57 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > > - for (ch = keybuf; ch < (keybuf + kbuflen) && keyform; ch++)
> > > > - fl_handle_form(keyform, formevent, *ch, xev);
> > >
> > > that is, Input Method server migh
On Thursday 19 December 2002 12:57 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > > - for (ch = keybuf; ch < (keybuf + kbuflen) && keyform; ch++)
> > > - fl_handle_form(keyform, formevent, *ch, xev);
> >
> > that is, Input Method server might send an event with multibyte string
> > in keybuf and kbuflen > 1 to
On Thursday 19 December 2002 8:40 am, Shigeru Miyata wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As an aside, I also believe that this could be made to work with cghan's
> > stuff because every composed char has a unique keysym. (Am I right here?)
> > That means fl_XLookupString could be
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(B
(B> As an aside, I also believe that this could be made to work with
(Bcghan's
(B> stuff because every composed char has a unique keysym. (Am I right
(Bhere?)
(B> That means fl_XLookupString could be modified to work with far eastern
(B
(B> langua
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Jean-Marc, did you ever pass this on to Rod? Any feedback?
No I did not. I've been pretty busy with 1.2.2 and real work recently.
I'll try to do that tomorrow. Or maybe you could do it :)
JMarc
On Thursday 12 December 2002 7:09 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Thursday 12 December 2002 2:43 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > Angus> Yes, I was thinking about this myself last night. I think
> > Angus> do_keyboard should be lik
On Friday 13 December 2002 3:33 pm, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > | only 1.0 version of xforms (then I will have the time to use only qt
> > | version of LyX as I need 0.88 version of xforms still for some other
> > | old program
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| only 1.0 version of xforms (then I will have the time to use only qt
| version of LyX as I need 0.88 version of xforms still for some other old
| programs.
For compiling them, or running them?
For compiling them.
On Thursday 12 December 2002 8:10 pm, Garst R. Reese wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
> > I'm going to cc the lyx-devel list with this. If I can find anyone
> > willing to test this stuff out, I'll be very happy indeed.
>
> Hi Angus,
> I'd be happy to test x86, linux. If you have specific tests you wa
> "Jean-Marc" == Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> (what are the differences between 0.89.5 and 0.89.6?)
Jean-Marc> I think that 0.89.6 is a bug fix over 0.89.6 only.
Hmmpf. Make that ``I think that 0.89.6 is only a bug fix over 0.89.5.''
Actually, the file lib/Change s
On Friday 13 December 2002 2:44 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> |
> | Angus> Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what
> | Angus> version of xforms to support in LyX 1.
> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Lars> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
Lars> | Angus> Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on
Lars> what | Angus> version of xforms to suppo
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Angus> Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what
| Angus> version of xforms to support in LyX 1.3? I'd prefer to throw
| Angus> out both 0.88 and 0.89. The former becau
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> On Friday 13 December 2002 12:06 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>> PS: > $ grep -n "#if" *.[Ch] | sed -n '/FL_/p'
>>
>> Too much sed lately?
Angus> Perhaps not enough grep. I dunno why I dodn't use this:
Angus> grep -n '#if' *.[Ch] | g
On Friday 13 December 2002 12:06 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> PS:
> > $ grep -n "#if" *.[Ch] | sed -n '/FL_/p'
>
> Too much sed lately?
Perhaps not enough grep. I dunno why I dodn't use this:
grep -n '#if' *.[Ch] | grep 'FL_'
Perhaps becuase I was trying to do it as a single command for matc
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 12:13:00PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > How much of the cruft would remain if we settle at 0.89.5 as minimum?
>
> 1 #ifdef block only and 1 piece of combox.C that should have a #if
> FL_VERSION < 1 but doesn't. I'll strip all but this block out and we can
> make a decisi
On Friday 13 December 2002 11:23 am, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 11:24:45AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> > Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what version of
> > xforms to support in LyX 1.3? I'd prefer to throw out both 0.88 and 0.89.
> > The former because i
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| only 1.0 version of xforms (then I will have the time to use only qt
| version of LyX as I need 0.88 version of xforms still for some other old
| programs.
For compiling them, or running them?
--
Lgb
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what
Angus> version of xforms to support in LyX 1.3? I'd prefer to throw
Angus> out both 0.88 and 0.89. The former because it's really old and
Angus> doesn't have image support.
On Friday 13 December 2002 11:28 am, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> Other than that I have still 0.88 installed and compile with
> it ;) as surely have other people too. I would like to release 1.3.0 which
> still suports all version but announce that the next version will support
> only 1.0 version of xfo
Angus Leeming wrote:
Agreed. Lars is suggesting setting up an entirely separate tree. I anticipate
having #ifdefs in LyX's xforms frontend for the foreseeable future.
Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what version of xforms
to support in LyX 1.3? I'd prefer to throw out both
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Friday 13 December 2002 11:01 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> Angus> You saw my posting to the xforms list in which I asked how the
>> Angus> future would pan out. I think that it can
On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 11:24:45AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Having said that, did we come to a consensual view on what version of
> xforms to support in LyX 1.3? I'd prefer to throw out both 0.88 and 0.89.
> The former because it's really old and doesn't have image support. The
> latter becau
On Friday 13 December 2002 11:01 am, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> You saw my posting to the xforms list in which I asked how the
> Angus> future would pan out. I think that it can be summarised as
> Angus> "interested but no tim
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> You saw my posting to the xforms list in which I asked how the
Angus> future would pan out. I think that it can be summarised as
Angus> "interested but no time for active development". That means
Angus> also that anyone interested i
On Friday 13 December 2002 9:29 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Thursday 12 December 2002 9:50 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > | Incidentally, I have patches for many of the xforms bugs that
> | >
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Incidentally, I have patches for many of the xforms bugs that
Angus> currently affect LyX. I really think that rolling out an xforms
Angus> tree is a good idea. Once we've proved they work, it'll be easy
Angus> to get them rolled in
On Thursday 12 December 2002 8:10 pm, Garst R. Reese wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
> > I'm going to cc the lyx-devel list with this. If I can find anyone
> > willing to test this stuff out, I'll be very happy indeed.
>
> Hi Angus,
> I'd be happy to test x86, linux. If you have specific tests you wa
On Thursday 12 December 2002 2:43 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> Yes, I was thinking about this myself last night. I think
> Angus> do_keyboard should be like this:
>
> Yes, this seems fine. Did you try it? If you have a patch
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus>Their behavior when a client passes a KeyRelease event
Angus> is undefined.
Angus> At present XmbLookupString is definitely being invoked on
Angus> KeyRelease events. Might this be messing up solaris? Angus
This seems to be
that would make sense, since it used the keysym.
Alos, that means that it's an irrelevant difference as far as xforms is
concerned, since xforms should expect X's dead keys to be working correctly.
One other difference between xforms and lyx that I've found.
LyXLookupString has this at
>>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> One glaring difference is this in LyXLookupString: if (xic) {
Angus> #if 1 // somehow it is necessary to do the lookup. Why? (JMarc)
Angus> XLookupString(&event->xkey, buffer_return,
On Wednesday 11 December 2002 1:45 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Angus> JMarc, you mentioned that xforms' version of LyXLookupString
> Angus> was broken on solaris. Can you su
>>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> JMarc, you mentioned that xforms' version of LyXLookupString
Angus> was broken on solaris. Can you supply me with more information?
What I know is that the code in xforms is derived fro
JMarc, you mentioned that xforms' version of LyXLookupString was broken on
solaris. Can you supply me with more information?
Angus
35 matches
Mail list logo
