Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Andre Poenitz wrote:
Is there a specific reason for the copy of the Encoding instead
of using something like
encodings.getFromLyXName(encoding_)->getSymbolList()
?
This:
GuiSymbols.cpp: In member function 'void
lyx::frontend::GuiSymbols
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Andre Poenitz wrote:
Is there a specific reason for the copy of the Encoding instead
of using something like
encodings.getFromLyXName(encoding_)->getSymbolList()
?
This:
GuiSymbols.cpp: In member function 'void
lyx::frontend::GuiSymbols::updateSymbolList(bool)':
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Is there a specific reason for the copy of the Encoding instead
> of using something like
>
> encodings.getFromLyXName(encoding_)->getSymbolList()
>
> ?
This:
GuiSymbols.cpp: In member function 'void
lyx::frontend::GuiSymbols::updateSymbolList(bool)':
GuiSymbols.cpp:295:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 04:15:42PM +0100, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Index: src/frontends/qt4/GuiSymbols.cpp
> ===
> --- src/frontends/qt4/GuiSymbols.cpp (Revision 22860)
> +++ src/frontends/qt4/GuiSymbols.cpp (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -2
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
But the initial calculation is very long if you set encoding to utf8
(more than a minute).
Yes, this is a general problem. The iconv processes are very expensive if the
whole unicode range is involved (especially on Windows, apparently; here
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> > And switching from one category to another takes
> > 10 seconds each time ("Display all" is unchecked).
>
> Better with the attached?
The attached patch is significantly faster on switching.
Furthermore, I tend to disable "display all" for utf8.
Jürgen
Index: src/fr
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> But the initial calculation is very long if you set encoding to utf8
> (more than a minute).
Yes, this is a general problem. The iconv processes are very expensive if the
whole unicode range is involved (especially on Windows, apparently; here,
it "just" takes 30 seco
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
1. the dialog becomes slow. This is mainly because of the expensive
category handling.
Should be better now. We now recalculate the categories only if necessary
(i.e. if the encoding changes)
But the initial calculation is very long if you
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> 1. the dialog becomes slow. This is mainly because of the expensive
> category handling.
Should be better now. We now recalculate the categories only if necessary
(i.e. if the encoding changes)
> 2. lots of symbols are missing in the dialog. This is a general problem:
Edwin Leuven wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
But if you leave the box "Display all" unchecked there is no need for
much room IMO.
i agree with jürgen fwiw, the box on the side is a waste of space...
Well I personally like to have a global view of what's available. In the
same vein I'd very
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
But if you leave the box "Display all" unchecked there is no need for
much room IMO.
i agree with jürgen fwiw, the box on the side is a waste of space...
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
By the way, I think I'd prefer a side list widget instead of combo at
the top for the category selection.
I don't. I think we need all space for the character browser.
But if you leave the box "Display all" unchecked there is no need for
mu
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> By the way, I think I'd prefer a side list widget instead of combo at
> the top for the category selection.
I don't. I think we need all space for the character browser.
Jürgen
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Or we could fill in all category once and for all at construction and
> then filter the displayed category depending on the encoding used.
I'm just working on something like this.
> Yes, using a View/Model is always better than using the convenience
> Widget class that
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
To mitigate this problem I think we should only offer a view of the
symbols in current category. That's what MSWord and OO Writer do AFAIK.
We already have that. It doesn't help, though, since the categories
need to
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
To mitigate this problem I think we should only offer a view of the
symbols in current category. That's what MSWord and OO Writer do AFAIK.
We already have that. It doesn't help, though, since the categories need to be
calculated nevertheless
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
To mitigate this problem I think we should only offer a view of the
symbols in current category. That's what MSWord and OO Writer do AFAIK.
We already have that.
This is new then... I guess you read my mind ;-)
It doesn't help, though, sinc
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> To mitigate this problem I think we should only offer a view of the
> symbols in current category. That's what MSWord and OO Writer do AFAIK.
We already have that. It doesn't help, though, since the categories need to be
calculated nevertheless (the combo is still neede
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
If we had access to something like python's unicodedata in C++, we
could also add nice tooltips displaying the name of the glyph.
Ideas welcome.
Ideas in no particular order:
- The information brought by QFontDatabase::writingSystem() seem
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
If we allowed all unicode symbols, be it in utf8 inputenc or XeTeX
(which we do not support yet properly), this would ask for trouble,
since neither in inputenc nor with XeTeX you can just insert any
unicode char without further ado.
having
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> If we allowed all unicode symbols, be it in utf8 inputenc or XeTeX (which
> we do not support yet properly), this would ask for trouble, since neither
> in inputenc nor with XeTeX you can just insert any unicode char without
> further ado.
having written this, there is
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Imagine that I want to use XeteX and I set the encoding to utf8, I
> should be allowed to access all unicode symbols, independently of the
> unicodesymbols file, which would then be unneeded, right?
I don't think so. I never used XeTeX, but I think you have to declare a
Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Juergen,
It is not clear to me how I can use this dialog. My encodings is set to
"Language Default" so I guess this is "latin-1". If I want to use
characters not in this subset, do I have to set the document encoding to
'utf8'? Or is this langu
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> Juergen,
>
> It is not clear to me how I can use this dialog. My encodings is set to
> "Language Default" so I guess this is "latin-1". If I want to use
> characters not in this subset, do I have to set the document encoding to
> 'utf8'? Or is this language dependent? But
24 matches
Mail list logo
