On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:54:46PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> The "big change" is to let 'setCursorFromCoordinates' descent into insets.
> The necessary code was already present in the handler for LFUN_DOWN, but
> not used by e.g. LFUN_NEXT. So apart from removing code that I did not
> understa
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 06:11:38PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> So in present state this patch does not improve anything.
>
We should spend some time seeing if we can get it to work though, this
would solve a large number of serious problems. I'll see if I can look
at it ...
regards
john
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| The following patch seems to provide a smoother Cursor/Page up/down
| than we currently have.
I just tested it.
Continues page-down flashes between beginnign of document and where
the corsor is supposed to be.
When the cursor enters an inset it is una
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 03:51:53PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote:
>> And now please: What about actually testing the patch?
>
| Ok, forget about the patch.
why?
--
Lgb
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wednesday 27 November 2002 2:52 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
>> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> | On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:45PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> >> This is inconsistent, would't compile on my box and will have Lars
>>
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 2:52 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:45PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> >> This is inconsistent, would't compile on my box and will have Lars
> >> jumping up and down crying "don't pass const
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 03:51:53PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote:
> And now please: What about actually testing the patch?
Ok, forget about the patch.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson)
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 03:52:31PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> const on pod types in signatures have no meaning.
I know.
But they have a meaning in the .C, namely raising compiler errors when one
tries to change them.
> So better to leave them out.
I ran into a function that modified t
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:45PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> This is inconsistent, would't compile on my box and will have Lars jumping up
>> and down crying "don't pass const int". For reasons I've yet to fathom.
>
| And actually I doubt Lars will
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:45PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> This is inconsistent, would't compile on my box and will have Lars jumping up
> and down crying "don't pass const int". For reasons I've yet to fathom.
And actually I doubt Lars will jump as it adds modern cruft ("const" is not
even
On Wed, Nov 27, 2002 at 01:59:45PM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> This is inconsistent, would't compile on my box
That's funny, because it should.
> and will have Lars jumping up
> and down crying "don't pass const int". For reasons I've yet to fathom.
> +++ lyxtext.h 27 Nov 2002 12:43:43 -
>
On Wednesday 27 November 2002 12:54 pm, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> The following patch seems to provide a smoother Cursor/Page up/down
> than we currently have.
>
> As it is fairly intrusive (over 100 lines removed) I would not mind if
> someone else had a look.
This is inconsistent, would't compile o
12 matches
Mail list logo
