Re: A File class
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 12:32:02PM +, Angus Leeming spake thusly: > Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:20:27PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > >> Hmm the bag says: "Blended & Packed by R. Twinning & Company Limited, > >> London, England." > >> > >> So I guess it you who export all the stuff "not worthy of the name". > > > > Guess why they export it ;-) > > ;-) No, Twinings is good. It's Lipton's Yellow Label that makes hairs grow > on my tongue. English name but found only outside England. Foul stuff. Ah yes. Lipton's Yellow Liquid ;-) > -- > Angus > Martin pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: A File class
Andre Poenitz wrote: > On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:20:27PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: >> Hmm the bag says: "Blended & Packed by R. Twinning & Company Limited, >> London, England." >> >> So I guess it you who export all the stuff "not worthy of the name". > > Guess why they export it ;-) ;-) No, Twinings is good. It's Lipton's Yellow Label that makes hairs grow on my tongue. English name but found only outside England. Foul stuff. -- Angus
Re: A File class
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 01:20:27PM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Hmm the bag says: "Blended & Packed by R. Twinning & Company Limited, > London, England." > > So I guess it you who export all the stuff "not worthy of the name". Guess why they export it ;-) Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
Re: A File class
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Calm! The English drink tea for this reason. Of course, you foreigners have | nothing worthy of the name so I suggest you go "Om" instead ;-) Hmm the bag says: "Blended & Packed by R. Twinning & Company Limited, London, England." So I guess it you who export all the stuff "not worthy of the name". But I drink it anyway! -- Lgb
Re: A File class
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | I am talking about how LyX stores/outputs references to external > | files. That is the only interaction I am interested in here. > | > | Actually, what other interest does LyX have in files? > > We read them, we write them, we check if they are there, we iterate > over directories, we search for files, we delete files, we delete > directories. we move from relative to absolute paths and back again... Then we are talking about another class entirely. I think that the two can co-exist quite happily but that this "class to interact with files" is entirely orthogonal to my suggested "class to store how LyX should output a filename having stored it internally with an absolute path". > | If you want to implement the FileName class using boost::filesystem, > | fine. But IMO that is an implementation detail. > > And I asked you to have a look... not more... it was dismissed as > bloat... No. I said that it would be bloat to use such a thing in this instance. For reasons that I hope are now clear. > I am just getting tired of such comments... it does not matter that > you only do it once, when everybody else does it once (or twice) as > well... Calm! The English drink tea for this reason. Of course, you foreigners have nothing worthy of the name so I suggest you go "Om" instead ;-) -- Angus
Re: A File class
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | > | | > | > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | > | > | On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: | > | > | > Opinions? | > | > | | > | > | Good. | > | > | > | > I think you should have a look at boost::filesystem and see how that | > | > fits. | > | | > | I _knew_ you would say that. Angus buys himself a beer. | > | | > | My entire point was that our requirements here are _very_ simple. Is the | > | filename input as relative to the buffer path? | > | > This is graphics/external only, please obtain a broader picture. | | I am talking about how LyX stores/outputs references to external files. | That is the only interaction I am interested in here. | | Actually, what other interest does LyX have in files? We read them, we write them, we check if they are there, we iterate over directories, we search for files, we delete files, we delete directories. we move from relative to absolute paths and back again... | > | If so output it relative to | > | that path. Always storing it internally as an absolute path guarantees | > | that we won't screw up as we move an inset between buffers. | > | | > | That's it. No need for a pile more bloat. | > | > a nice function there and new function and class there, let's add | > another function... oh we need this as well all solved at the same | > time with a nice lib. | | If you want to implement the FileName class using boost::filesystem, fine. | But IMO that is an implementation detail. And I asked you to have a look... not more... it was dismissed as bloat... | Personally, I thnk that a "string | abs_name, bool output_relative_to_buffer_path" is all it needs. | | And I don't think I am talking total crap since _most_ of my dealings with | LyX appear focussed on how the kernel interacts with the world around it. | | > And just drop the comment about bloat. I am beginning to take almost | > all such comments as insults now... | | Then you should be more robust. I think I have been robust enough. | There was no intent to abuse; I made what I | feel is a valid comment. Anyway, I'm the least abusive guy I know. I am just getting tired of such comments... it does not matter that you only do it once, when everybody else does it once (or twice) as well... -- Lgb
Re: A File class
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > | > | > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > | > > | > | On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > | > | > Opinions? > | > | > | > | Good. > | > > | > I think you should have a look at boost::filesystem and see how that > | > fits. > | > | I _knew_ you would say that. Angus buys himself a beer. > | > | My entire point was that our requirements here are _very_ simple. Is the > | filename input as relative to the buffer path? > > This is graphics/external only, please obtain a broader picture. I am talking about how LyX stores/outputs references to external files. That is the only interaction I am interested in here. Actually, what other interest does LyX have in files? > | If so output it relative to > | that path. Always storing it internally as an absolute path guarantees > | that we won't screw up as we move an inset between buffers. > | > | That's it. No need for a pile more bloat. > > a nice function there and new function and class there, let's add > another function... oh we need this as well all solved at the same > time with a nice lib. If you want to implement the FileName class using boost::filesystem, fine. But IMO that is an implementation detail. Personally, I thnk that a "string abs_name, bool output_relative_to_buffer_path" is all it needs. And I don't think I am talking total crap since _most_ of my dealings with LyX appear focussed on how the kernel interacts with the world around it. > And just drop the comment about bloat. I am beginning to take almost > all such comments as insults now... Then you should be more robust. There was no intent to abuse; I made what I feel is a valid comment. Anyway, I'm the least abusive guy I know. Ok, ok have a smiley ;-) -- Angus
Re: A File class
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: | | > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: | > | > Opinions? | > | | > | Good. | > | > I think you should have a look at boost::filesystem and see how that | > fits. | | I _knew_ you would say that. Angus buys himself a beer. | | My entire point was that our requirements here are _very_ simple. Is the | filename input as relative to the buffer path? This is graphics/external only, please obtain a broader picture. | If so output it relative to | that path. Always storing it internally as an absolute path guarantees that | we won't screw up as we move an inset between buffers. | | That's it. No need for a pile more bloat. a nice function there and new function and class there, let's add another function... oh we need this as well all solved at the same time with a nice lib. And just drop the comment about bloat. I am beginning to take almost all such comments as insults now... -- Lgb
Re: A File class
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > | On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > | > Opinions? > | > | Good. > > I think you should have a look at boost::filesystem and see how that > fits. I _knew_ you would say that. Angus buys himself a beer. My entire point was that our requirements here are _very_ simple. Is the filename input as relative to the buffer path? If so output it relative to that path. Always storing it internally as an absolute path guarantees that we won't screw up as we move an inset between buffers. That's it. No need for a pile more bloat. -- Angus
Re: A File class
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: | > Opinions? | | Good. I think you should have a look at boost::filesystem and see how that fits. -- Lgb
Re: A File class
On Wed, Jun 04, 2003 at 09:34:44AM +, Angus Leeming wrote: > Opinions? Good. Andre' -- Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security, will not have, nor do they deserve, either one. (T. Jefferson or B. Franklin or both...)
