* Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 15:18]:
> Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | * Lars Gullik Bjønnes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010504 14:28]:
> | > Baruch Even <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | >
> | > | > The intention is that in the minibuffer you will not be allowed to
> | > | > enter "free text" strings. i.e. lfuns with arguments, but will _only_
> | > | > be allowed to enter the lfun. If the lfun requires an argument it will
> | > | > be asked for (or more than one). To do this the information we keep
> | > | > about each lfun must also hold the number or arguments and their type.
> | > | > Not hard to do, but I need some time...
> | > |
> | > | This is fine, the current lfun's do not require arguments so this
> | > | transitional flaw is of no concern.
> | >
> | > Several of the lfuns require arguments.
> |
> | >From what I've seen there was only some help related lfun that needed
> | arguments, at least it was the only one who announced it in the LFUN
> | array.
>
> LFUN_WORDFINDFORWARD
> [ Long list snipped ]
> + more
For my defence I only have the fact the only LFUN_HELP_OPEN says in
LyXAction.C that it takes arguments, the others have no mention of it in
their definition.
Why is this inconsistency? If Argument is unneeded, remove it. If it's
needed why are the others not declaring it?
--
Baruch Even
http://baruch.ev-en.org/
