Re: Bug 210 patch

2002-02-19 Thread Allan Rae
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002, John Levon wrote: > On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 01:26:25PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > > > What are you on about? What rat's nest? Which code? > > [pause] > > Maybe I see what you want to do now. > > You have to admit that pissing around with the cursor is not the most > hygeinic

Re: Bug 210 patch

2002-02-19 Thread John Levon
On Tue, Feb 19, 2002 at 01:26:25PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > What are you on about? What rat's nest? Which code? > [pause] > Maybe I see what you want to do now. You have to admit that pissing around with the cursor is not the most hygeinic of code. Especially as we need to do it /again/ somew

Re: Bug 210 patch

2002-02-18 Thread Allan Rae
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, John Levon wrote: > Looking at the code can I again please ask for some sanity here i.e.: > > disableDEPM(); > > // critical code > > enableDEPM(); > > instead of that rat's nest ? What are you on about? What rat's nest? Which code? [pause] Maybe I see wh

Re: bug #210

2002-02-18 Thread Allan Rae
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > | par->erase(pos); > | + // get the next valid iterator position > | + Paragraph::inset_iterator pit = par->InsetIterator(pos); [...] > This cann

Re: Bug 210 patch

2002-02-18 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 10:16:51AM +, John Levon wrote: > current state of not actually removing the inseterror anyway ! oh well ok, it just doesn't update properly, it does get removed... john -- "What, so the microchips are in the MCU ?" - Sam Burton learning about the PC archit

Bug 210 patch

2002-02-18 Thread John Levon
Looking at the code can I again please ask for some sanity here i.e.: disableDEPM(); // critical code enableDEPM(); instead of that rat's nest ? This patch fixes the memory access problems, whilst leaving it in its current state of not actually removing the inseterror

Re: bug #210

2002-02-18 Thread John Levon
On Mon, Feb 18, 2002 at 06:43:22PM +1000, Allan Rae wrote: > + // get the next valid iterator position > + Paragraph::inset_iterator pit = par->InsetIterator(pos); yeah makes no difference. neither does "+ pit = par->..." I think the trick to getting the

bug #210

2002-02-18 Thread Allan Rae
The following change to BufferView::removeAutoInsets() at around BufferView2.C:197 seems to do the trick. Recompiling with updated cvs so this will take forever so I'm going home. Someone care to check this with their own tests? Michael, I can't crash LyX using the method you described or any