On Sat, Jan 31, 2026 at 07:52:43PM +0100, Jean-Marc Lasgouttes wrote: > Le 30/01/2026 à 21:27, Scott Kostyshak a écrit : > > > I do not think that I broke something else. But of course it would be > > > interesting to know. > > > > I gave it a try, but I get the following when opening one of my files: > > > > /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-linux-gnu/15/../../../../include/c++/15/bits/stl_vector.h:1370: > > reference std::vector<lyx::Row::Element>::back() [_Tp = lyx::Row::Element, > > _Alloc = std::allocator<lyx::Row::Element>]: Assertion '!this->empty()' > > failed. > > > > Would this be termed "an STL assertion" ? > > Indeed. This should be fixed now in the branch. Note however that I can also > crash LyX by browsing the UserGuide. I'll look at it ASAP.
Thanks! > I have a very untechnical question for you all: currently, I use the term > 'breakable insets' to describe the insets that can be handled. Trouble is, > they become "broken insets", which is unfortunate. I thought about inline > insets, but this term is already used in opposition to "display insets". So, > what would be a catchy term that I could use instead? Wrappable insets? Splitable insets? Disjoint insets? Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- lyx-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
