Martin Vermeer wrote:
> No, it was right originally. And remained right when I added the test
> for a display() type inset one line below. It became wrong only when
> someone(s) started tinkering with the ways used to denote the
> one-past-the-end of the row (IIRC originally next_row.pos() ), and
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 05:46:17PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
>
> Martin Vermeer wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:32:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
> > A possibly related problem that you see in multi-line paragraphs in
> > insets, is that the right edge of the
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 05:40:34PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
>
> > case of the inset on line 1248 we really *do* want the first
> > 'character' -- i.e., the inset -- on the next line to decide if we
> > should not stretch this line. Different situation.)
>
> Cool. Made the change
John Levon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 06:05:32PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
>
>> > Are you sure ? AFAIK this bug has existed since the day Andre
>> > introduced it in his cleanups.
>>
>> No I'm not sure. I though that I remembered ;-)
>
> FYI: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 06:05:32PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> > Are you sure ? AFAIK this bug has existed since the day Andre introduced
> > it in his cleanups.
>
> No I'm not sure. I though that I remembered ;-)
FYI: http://bugzilla.lyx.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1282
john
--
Khendon's Law:
John Levon wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 05:46:17PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
>
>> No, the problem I see is even for multi-row insets, that the inset go too
>> much to the right and you don't see the right border of it nor even the
>> rightest part of the text. Do you know the cause? It
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 05:46:17PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein wrote:
> No, the problem I see is even for multi-row insets, that the inset go too
> much to the right and you don't see the right border of it nor even the
> rightest part of the text. Do you know the cause? It seems to me that this
> w
Martin Vermeer wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:32:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
>
>> width of a single inset row is broken.
>
> Ah yes, sorry, did not read carefully. An eternity (1.4 cycle) bug
> this too.
>
> The inset width should be shorter in case of a single line. I ha
Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Yes... line 1257 above. Change it into
>
>1257 && !pit->isNewline(row.endpos() - 1)
>
> ... remember endpos() is really one-past-the-end right? (But in the
Oh yes I *do* remember. ;-)
> case of the inset on line 1248 we really *do* want the first
> '
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:32:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
> width of a single inset row is broken.
Ah yes, sorry, did not read carefully. An eternity (1.4 cycle) bug
this too.
The inset width should be shorter in case of a single line. I had code
for this at some point, but it
On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 04:32:40PM +0200, Alfredo Braunstein spake thusly:
> width of a single inset row is broken.
Did this ever work (lately?) The text is indented with the standard
paragraph indent.
> width of a row ending on a line-break is broken.
Huh? That should work. The code doing it
width of a single inset row is broken.
width of a row ending on a line-break is broken.
Ideas?
Regards, Alfredo
<>
12 matches
Mail list logo