On Fri, Feb 14, 2003 at 09:31:25AM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> Ok. Let's have a look.
> + // delete empty mathbox (LFUN_BACKSPACE and LFUN_DELETE)
> + bool remove_inset;
> Uninitialized variable. This is actually a bug I just noticed.
> remove_inset may contain a non-ze
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 07:23:54PM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> > and it does not really follow LyX coding rules.
>
> I have read the 'coding rules' and I would appreciate it if you can show
> me the problems of my patch. It certainly need time to get used to all
> the rules.
Ok. Let's have a look.
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:06:02PM +0100, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> The patch does not apply cleanly to current CVS
The patch was made several weeks ago for 1.3CVS. I should have made
another one
> and it does not really follow LyX coding rules.
I have read the 'coding rules' and I would ap
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 06:06:02PM +0100, Andre' Poenitz wrote:
> Seems to work though. I just applied some modification of this patch.
Aerm. Could you please verify it works and close the bug?
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have, nor do they d
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 10:46:54AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 10:40:25AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> > If we are no longer on freeze, could anyone have a look at bug686? The
> > patch is pretty small and easy to understand.
>
> I guess no one is interested in such small improveme
On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 10:40:25AM -0600, Bo Peng wrote:
> If we are no longer on freeze, could anyone have a look at bug686? The
> patch is pretty small and easy to understand.
I guess no one is interested in such small improvement right now. I will
just patch my own tree and wait.
--
Bo Peng
If we are no longer on freeze, could anyone have a look at bug686? The
patch is pretty small and easy to understand.
Thanks.
--
Bo Peng
