On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:16 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck <rikih...@lyx.org> wrote:
> On 04/16/2018 09:10 PM, Joel Kulesza wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 7:06 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck <rikih...@lyx.org> > wrote: > >> On 04/16/2018 08:56 PM, Scott Kostyshak wrote: >> > On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 12:45:39AM +0000, Joel Kulesza wrote: >> >> On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 12:08 PM, Richard Kimberly Heck < >> rikih...@lyx.org> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >>> One polishing thing I've considered is to allow this to be done by >> >>> clicking on the spinning wheel thing that pops up during compilation >> (or >> >>> maybe double clicking), and possibly to bind this to some key. Any >> >>> thoughts? >> >>> >> >> Regarding polishing, and spoken in ignorance because I haven't yet >> tested, >> >> one issue I'm often caught by is beginning a compile, spotting an >> error, >> >> and correcting it before the compile finishes. Does a check for >> document >> >> consistency during the render make sense? For example, a dialog to >> ask if >> >> the compilation should be restarted if changes are detected? Perhaps >> this >> >> is best set to be user-configurable so that the dialog doesn't become a >> >> nuisance with current behavior kept as the default? >> > So suppose I'm compiling, and then I start typing. If this feature is >> > enabled, a dialog would pop up when I press a key? Perhaps instead, we >> > could add a menu entry next to "Cancel Background Process" along the >> > lines of "Restart Compilation", that is also only visible when >> > compiling? Or we could list it as an example in the LFUN doc. e.g. >> > "consider making a keyboard shortcut for <<command-sequence >> > export-cancel; buffer-export>> to restart compilation". >> >> I often compile to check something, and keep typing on purpose. Indeed, >> part of the point >> of background compilation is to allow that sort of thing. So I'd be >> inclined not to do this >> kind of thing. It's easy enough to cancel manually in that case and >> re-start---though we could >> make canceling easier (which was the original question). >> > > Sorry I didn't clarify, as I noted in my reply to Scott, I'd imagine the > query would be triggered by saving the document with the changes during the > ongoing compile. > > > I do that, too, since I save very often. > I see. Alas, that's why I recommended keeping the current behavior as-is but providing an option for the proposed behavior. Thanks, Joel
