On Tue, 16 Dec 2003, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Christian Ridderström wrote:
> > Speaking of that, I used my script to see how the lfuns have changed
> > between the recent releases. The lfuns for Lyx 1.3.1 - 1.3.3 are the
> > same, but the n:o lfuns has dropped from 241 to 238 in the latest
> > CVS. However, the n:o lfuns in
> >
> > 1.3.3 is... 241
> > HEAD is... 238
> > both 1.3.3 and HEAD is... 206
>
> Which indicates two things:
> 1. Some lfuns are becoming more powerful. You can do more from
> outside lyx 1.4.x than you could from outside lyx 1.3.x with fewer
> lfuns.
> 2. We make no effort to translate old-style lfuns to new style lfuns.
>
> I have been thinking for a while of an lfun2lfun script. As an
> example:
>
> citation-insert -> dialog-show-new-inset citation
What would this lfun2lfun-script operate on? (Or do you mean that it would
act like a filter on commands typed in the mini-buffer, see what I wrote
in the end?)
> inset-apply citation LatexCommand \citeN[see]{leeming2003}
>
> an aside: I should strip out the part handled by the buffer (as
> oppossed to the inset), "LatexCommand" here...
huh? (guess I can ignore this)
> The point I'd like to make is that this lfun syntax is powerful but
> cumbersome. I can imagine an lfun2lfun script that generated such
> commands from simpler input by the user.
>
> That way, LyX will have to handle fewer lfuns and the user will still
> have his syntactic sugar.
This might be what you already suggest, but how about allowing
'lfun-macros' (i.e. translations) to be defined in an external text file.
It could look like this:
lfun-define "citation-insert" "dialog-show-new-inset citation"
which would mean that when the mini-buffer receives 'citation-insert', it
will look through the text file (or a loaded database) for translations
and apply them. In addition, if the user can edit this text file, he will
be able to create new lfuns as well.
/Christian
--
Christian Ridderström http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
