Georg Baum wrote:
Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
Georg Baum wrote:
(and it would even be better if the python
phantom would be killed).
A phantom cannot be killed, it is not alive ;-)
Well, it is alive enough to have real world effects.
FYI Hangzai I have written somewhere in my TODO list that tex2lyx should
be integrated into LyX. This would ease the maintenance as we won't have
to care about the LyX file format compatibility (because we would fill
in the Buffer structure directly and let LyX care about writing a proper
LyX file).
The integration might have advantages (e.g. inplace tex2lyx for clipboard
snippets), but file format changes will only play a marginal role. The
reason why it is some work to update tex2lyx to the newest file format does
not lie in syntactical changes, e.g. \layout->\begin_layout. These were
always done very quickly.
Because you know how to do it quickly and you know the LyX file format.
Most developpers don't know the file format so the other advantage of
integrating tex2lyx is that it's easier for us to help.
The difficult thing is to support added
functionality: When I adapted tex2lyx from the minipage to the box inset it
was easy to simply change the output from the old minipage case. The
difficult thing is to parse the other boxes correctly (ovalbox etc). This
is still not done.
Yes but the parsing difficulty is independant of the integration, isn't
it? I mean it will have to be done, integration or not.
Abdel.
Or in the unicode case: You have to translate the TeX stuff to unicode. This
is difficult with all the encoding switching that may happen. Spitting out
the result in utf8 is as easy as filling a paragraph container.
Georg
