On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 10:26:13AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Of course this is not nice code, but when Lars has finished playing around
> | with stuff that officially has to wait until 1.3 he will probably tell you
> | that it is not the
On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 09:48:11AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Do I miss something?
The value of code is used in the call to insetAllowed.
Of course this is not nice code, but when Lars has finished playing around
with stuff that officially has to wait until 1.3 he will probably tell you
that
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:11:59AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:08:22AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > ...and feel free to explain what you mean... if this is clear to both of you,
> > to me it is Chinese ;-)
>
> The 'InsetCode' stuff is (from a strict OO point of v
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 12:42:43PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Ah, I see. Great explanation.
>
> I don't think this is undoable. The same functionality would require
> touching only five inset*.[hC] file pairs IIUC.
>
> Should I do it?
Well, if it works, it works. I guess Lars wants to get b
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:11:59AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:08:22AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > ...and feel free to explain what you mean... if this is clear to both of you,
> > to me it is Chinese ;-)
>
> The 'InsetCode' stuff is (from a strict OO point of
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 10:19:39AM +, John Levon wrote:
> of course, both solutions suck, and we really want proper RTTI
This would still make the user code decide which inset is 'ok' and which
not...
> or an inset_traits or something
This is 'usability-wise' not very different from the vi
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:11:59AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> virtual bool canBePutIntoALabel() const { return false; }
> true. With the InsetCode 'solution' you have to add the proper InsetCode
of course, both solutions suck, and we really want proper RTTI or an inset_traits
or something
On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 08:08:22AM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> ...and feel free to explain what you mean... if this is clear to both of you,
> to me it is Chinese ;-)
The 'InsetCode' stuff is (from a strict OO point of view at least - which I
not always support) a bad thing.
An object should
(grmpf) ChangeLog:
2002-01-29 Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* paragraph.C: Pop an alert box if we have an inset
in the label of a list environment that really,
really shouldn't be there. Like graphics etc.
But math, ERT, even footnote are OK. These
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 05:16:23PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 04:53:40PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> >> + // Here we test if we have an inset in the label of a list
> >> + // environment that
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 05:16:23PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Feel free to create the giant patch when we begin 1.3cvs
Okokok...
Andre'
--
André Pönitz .. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, Jan 29, 2002 at 04:53:40PM +0200, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> + // Here we test if we have an inset in the label of a list
> + // environment that really, really shouldn't be there. Like
> + // graphics etc. But math, ERT, even footnote are OK.
> +
12 matches
Mail list logo
