On Monday 12 August 2002 3:34 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Here it is. Tested as well as I could, but give it hell.
> If still alive after that, commit it.
It seemed Ok to me, so I committed it, although I admit I didn't try /really/
hard.
Keep up the good work and I look forward to Counters for
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Monday 12 August 2002 6:01 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
| > On Monday 12 August 2002 6:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > > The real problem comes when you allocate _two_ pointers.
|
| Lars, since we're on this subject, I'd like to make the following
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 08:02:32PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Monday 12 August 2002 8:03 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > > Why are you changing back something I just changed?
> > Because it crashed... see Angus' comment.
>
>
>
> I said that your change reset() -> reset("") will resul
On Monday 12 August 2002 6:01 pm, Angus Leeming wrote:
> On Monday 12 August 2002 6:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> > The real problem comes when you allocate _two_ pointers.
Lars, since we're on this subject, I'd like to make the following change. Are
you happy now that this is safe?
I'll
On Monday 12 August 2002 8:03 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> > Why are you changing back something I just changed?
> Because it crashed... see Angus' comment.
I said that your change reset() -> reset("") will result in an instant crash.
Angus
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 05:33:44PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Index: buffer.C
> | ===
> | RCS file: /cvs/lyx/lyx-devel/src/buffer.C,v
> | retrieving revision 1.367
> | diff
On Monday 12 August 2002 6:13 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> The real problem comes when you allocate _two_ pointers.
And in this case I wrap by new inside a boost::scoped_ptr, so it's guaranteed
to be safe.
Just to check, here's the code snippet.
Angus
class Counters;
class Buffer {
pr
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Monday 12 August 2002 4:36 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | ==
>> | +#include "counters.h"
>> |
>> | Buffer::Buffer(string const & file, bool ronly)
>> |
>> |: niceFile(true), lyx_clean(true), b
On Monday 12 August 2002 4:36 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | ==
> | +#include "counters.h"
> |
> | Buffer::Buffer(string const & file, bool ronly)
> |
> | : niceFile(true), lyx_clean(true), bak_clean(true),
> |
> | unnamed(false), dep_c
Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Index: buffer.C
| ===
| RCS file: /cvs/lyx/lyx-devel/src/buffer.C,v
| retrieving revision 1.367
| diff -u -p -r1.367 buffer.C
| --- buffer.C 2002/08/12 00:15:16 1.367
| +++ buffer.C
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| ==
| +#include "counters.h"
>
| Buffer::Buffer(string const & file, bool ronly)
| : niceFile(true), lyx_clean(true), bak_clean(true),
| unnamed(false), dep_clean(0), read_only(ronly),
| - filename_(file), users(0)
| + file
On Monday 12 August 2002 3:34 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Here it is. Tested as well as I could, but give it hell.
> If still alive after that, commit it.
Did you really test it against current CVS?
- par->counters().reset();
+ buf->counters().reset(""
On Mon, Aug 12, 2002 at 03:39:18PM +0100, Angus Leeming wrote:
> U. Would anyone mind terribly if I changed buffer.[Ch]:
>
> buffer.h
> ==
> -#include "counters.h"
> +class Counters;
Seems worthwhile.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not ha
On Monday 12 August 2002 3:34 pm, Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Here it is. Tested as well as I could, but give it hell.
> If still alive after that, commit it.
>
> ChangeLog:
>
> 2002-08-12 Martin Vermeer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * buffer.C:
> buffer.h:
> lyxtext.h:
> paragraph.
14 matches
Mail list logo
