> "Lars" == Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Here is the patch I came up with. Lars, is it OK?
Lars> ok
Thanks, done now.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
| Angus> Sure and sure. I showed you the logic path. The behaviour is
| Angus> just a natural result of same.
>
| OK, I have to admit that you were right :)
>
| Here is the patch I came u
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Sure and sure. I showed you the logic path. The behaviour is
Angus> just a natural result of same.
OK, I have to admit that you were right :)
Here is the patch I came up with. Lars, is it OK?
I have opened a bug for that at:
http
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> I guess (I can see) that this is the block that's actually
> Angus> launching the "3 words checked" dialog (inside
> showSummary()). Angus> Control returns from this function back to
> QDialogView::show() Angus> which goes on to raise()/show() the real
> spellch
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> I guess (I can see) that this is the block that's actually
Angus> launching the "3 words checked" dialog (inside showSummary()).
Angus> Control returns from this function back to QDialogView::show()
Angus> which goes on to raise()/s
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> Anyway, following the code path, stripping out the noise...
> [...]
> Thanks for the nice analysis. I really have a hard time following the
> paths in this code.
I think that the trick is to always start in controllers/Dialog.C.
ControlSpellchecker and QSpellc
> "Jose'" == Jose' Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jose'> On Thursday 21 July 2005 14:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> It is easier to follow somebody who knows all the corridors of a
>> big house that to find your way out later.
Jose'> Funny, I thought that you meant to say "instead of
On Thursday 21 July 2005 14:32, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> It is easier to follow somebody who knows all the corridors of a big
> house that to find your way out later.
Funny, I thought that you meant to say "instead of going up and down
through all those stairs". ;-)
> JMarc
--
José Abíl
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: I'll make some time to investigate.
Angus> Will probably take me a couple of days. OK?
>> No problem really. I am so lost, that any help anytime is fine.
Angus> Note that I don't know this code at all b
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> I'll make some time to investigate. Will probably take me a
> Angus> couple of days. OK?
>
> No problem really. I am so lost, that any help anytime is fine.
Note that I don't know this code at all but it has been broken from day
one. Somehow the Spellchecker d
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> I'll make some time to investigate. Will probably take me a
Angus> couple of days. OK?
No problem really. I am so lost, that any help anytime is fine.
JMarc
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
So the real problem is at step 3/. How can a dialog which is not shown
on screen and which has been hidden according to MVC machinery still
be on Qt list of dialogs?
I'll make some time to investigate. Will probably take me a couple of days. OK?
Angus
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> It looks to me like this signal is entirely within the Qt event
Angus> loop machinery, no? No wonder it's driving you nuts.
Indeed :)
>> #0 lyx::frontend::ControlSpellchecker::showSummary (this=0x88337a8)
>> at src/frontends/contr
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Angus> ... well? Did it do the trick?
> No, it did not change anything.
> I attach the backtrace I get when breaking on the second
> ShowStatus.
It looks to me like this signal is entirely within the Qt event loop
machinery, no? No wonder it's driving you nuts.
> #0
> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Angus> ... well? Did it do the trick?
No, it did not change anything.
I attach the backtrace I get when breaking on the second ShowStatus.
JMarc
#0 lyx::frontend::ControlSpellchecker::showSummary (this=0x88337a8)
at ../../../../l
Angus Leeming wrote:
> If the dialog is closed then Dialog::isVisible() should return false.
> Assuming that it doesn't lie, why not just add this check to:
>
> void Dialog::update(string const & data)
> {
> + if (!isVisible())
> + return;
> if (controller().isBufferDependent() &&
>
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Helge> New document, type "test test test" Press "home" or move the
> Helge> cursor there. Press F7 for spell checking.
>
> Helge> First, I get "3 words checked". Well, that's fine, but _then_ I
> Helge> get the spell check dialog that claims to be 93% finished. All
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
