Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
Either that or set the format in your lyxrc.dist.
I'd prefer it not to crash without lyxrc.dist, so I'll change the code
to %x.
Joost
> "Joost" == Joost Verburg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Joost> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
José> We can either call it through its C interface or use a pipe to
José> get a result.
>> I'd rather avoid that.
Joost> Do you agree with changing the formatting code to %x right now
Joost> (the date
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
José> We can either call it through its C interface or use a pipe to
José> get a result.
I'd rather avoid that.
Do you agree with changing the formatting code to %x right now (the date
in the current locale) so the crashes are gone? We can think about
complicate
> "José" == José Matos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
José> Since we require python we can use it, the module time has
José> what you are requiring...
José> We can either call it through its C interface or use a pipe to
José> get a result.
I'd rather avoid that.
JMarc
Joost Verburg wrote:
> Do we need to include %A? I think %x alone would be enough.
I don't have a strong opinion (I use date-insert rarely). It's just what we
had until now.
> %#x gives the date plus weekday in the current locale on Windows. Is
> there a UNIX equivalent?
Not AFAICS. See
http://
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
Hm, yes, would be fine with me (i.e. %A, %x), even though the output is
different to what we have now, of course.
Do we need to include %A? I think %x alone would be enough.
%#x gives the date plus weekday in the current locale on Windows. Is
there a UNIX equivalen
On Tuesday 24 October 2006 2:46 pm, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> > "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> >> Can boost do that for us?
>
> Juergen> No idea. Which method do you think of?
>
> Well, I hoped somebody would look for
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> l7n?
localization. Seems I missed some chars ;-)
Jürgen
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Well, I hoped somebody would look for it :) So, I went to
>> boost.org, and it seems that there is a library that _may_ be
>> useful: http://www.boost.org/doc/html/date_time.html
Juergen> H
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Well, I hoped somebody would look for it :) So, I went to boost.org,
> and it seems that there is a library that _may_ be useful:
> http://www.boost.org/doc/html/date_time.html
Hm, seems to be more l7n-friendly than strftime, from what I can see.
> Now the question i
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
>> Can boost do that for us?
Juergen> No idea. Which method do you think of?
Well, I hoped somebody would look for it :) So, I went to boost.org,
and it seems that there is a library that _ma
Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote:
> Can boost do that for us?
No idea. Which method do you think of?
> We could also set the date format in lyxrc.dist and be done with it.
Yes, why not.
Jürgen
> "Juergen" == Juergen Spitzmueller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juergen> Joost Verburg wrote:
>> Juergen Spitzmueller wrote: > %e is not the same as %d, see my
>> comment on bugzilla.
>>
>> There is indeed a minor difference. %#d on Windows should be like
>> %e on UNIX.
>>
>> Why not use %x
Joost Verburg wrote:
> Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
> > %e is not the same as %d, see my comment on bugzilla.
>
> There is indeed a minor difference. %#d on Windows should be like %e on
> UNIX.
>
> Why not use %x for both, which gives the date representation appropriate
> for the current locale?
Hm
Juergen Spitzmueller wrote:
%e is not the same as %d, see my comment on bugzilla.
There is indeed a minor difference. %#d on Windows should be like %e on
UNIX.
Why not use %x for both, which gives the date representation appropriate
for the current locale?
also, someone who can reproduce
Joost Verburg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> %e is not supported as a formatting code for strftime by all compilers.
> At least with Windows/MSVC this causes change merging to fail (see
> Bugzilla 2923).
>
> Can I upload the attached patch to 1.4 and 1.5?
Did you read
http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=283
16 matches
Mail list logo
