>>>>> "Jean-Marc" == Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>>> "Angus" == Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>> Icon "dialog-show-new-inset graphics" "graphics.xpm" >>> Why ? Angus> Because it's three lines of code and it's done in Angus> ToolbarDefaults.C (which, as you note, is where this code Angus> should be). Shall I do it? Jean-Marc> Thqt does not mqke sense, IMO. This means that everybody Jean-Marc> who needs to add an icon will have to hunt for the right Jean-Marc> icon. Please, if you lfun names are too long, it's your Jean-Marc> fault :) Now that I have access to a proper qwerty keyboard, I'd like to add that it may be a compelling reason why this lfun should be named "inset-insert". Did anybody feel the need to rename file-insert to file-dialog-show-and-insert-file? For the same reasons, I think that inset-insert is a perfectly reasonable name for the purpose of inserting interactively any inset whether it needs a dialog or not. And for internal communication (the case where you pass the inset contents as argument) we could use inset-parse or soemthing like that. That said, I agree that the magic code to get the icon name should go to ToolbarDefaults. Also, Angus, if you feel like it, the menu and toolbar backends should really be changed into some controller and use proper signals instead of this stupid pimpls. JMarc
