Abdelrazak Younes wrote:
> No, there is a boost macro compatibility flag that I plan to use in the
> future for that. This flag will need a change of the "emit", "signals"
> and "slot" macros to "Q_EMIT", "Q_SIGNALS" and "Q_SLOT" or something
> like that. In the mean time, please accept my timeout::emit change that
> is really not a big deal.
Why not do the emit -> Q_EMIT change beforehand? It is independant of your
other changes, and would reduce the patch size. One thing at a time!
BTW, when skimming your patch I noticed:
Index: src/insets/insettabular.C
===================================================================
--- src/insets/insettabular.C (revision 14265)
+++ src/insets/insettabular.C (working copy)
@@ -586,7 +586,7 @@
// //if (hasSelection())
// // cur.selection() = false;
// col_type const col = tabular.column_of_cell(cur.idx());
-// int const t = cur.bv().top_y() +
cur.bv().painter().paperHeight();
+// int const t = cur.bv().top_y() + cur.bv().width();
// if (t < yo() + tabular.getHeightOfTabular()) {
// cur.bv().scrollDocView(t);
// cur.idx() =
tabular.getCellBelow(first_visible_cell) + col;
I guess this should be height(), not width()?
Georg
