Martin Vermeer wrote:
> Yes, this is a different problem. I get it too now, but not yesterday
> evening. Here:
>
> 1480 // If we have separators, this is not the last row of
> a
> 1481 // par, does not end in newline, and is not row above
> a
> 1482 // display inset... then stretch it
> 1483 if (ns
> 1484 && rit->end() < pit->size()
> 1485 && !pit->isNewline(next_row->pos()- 1)
> 1486 && !disp_inset
> 1487 ) {
> 1488 fill_separator = w / ns;
> 1489 } else if (is_rtl) {
> 1490 x += w;
> 1491 }
>
> It crashed on the isNewline() on line 1485, because next_row->pos()
> seems to contain nonsense (it should point to the first char of this
> row within its par). Adding a printout confirms this: either 0 or a
> very large value.
On a 20 sec read, I think they may be related: maybe your other change broke
this constant:
"rit->end() < pit->size => rit->next() != endrit"
In that case, rit->next() is maybe endrit and thus has nonsense information.
Note that I may be talking nonsense myself here... fell free to ignore if I
am. ;-)
Alfredo
