On Sat, 16 Jun 2001, Michael Koziarski wrote:
> The next attempt at a css based LyX webpage is up at
>
> http://www.koziarski.org/LyX/www-user/
Looks good.
> TODO
>
> 1) Insert font-metrics based on em measurement (not many to do, just a
>few things like table formatting etc.)
>
> 2) Test i
ok, i got it:
- insert a table-float
- insert a minipage
- insert a table
now all written stuff in the cells appears outside. single
minipage and tables works. it's the combination.
latest cvs from today.
the above is not an exotic combination! it's the
default for tables/figures side by side.
Andre Poenitz wrote:
>
> > How long to you want to wait?
>
> Until g++ 3.0 is shipping as default on major distributions would be not
> too far away, would it?
>
> > Admins have now had a couple of years to upgrade to 2.95.x, have they
> > done so?
>
> The ones in question have.
>
> Andre'
>
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> Untested: see attachment.
Thanks. Applied.
JMarc
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | I know it is Not Nice, and I would like to to be Nice, too. But not to the
| > | extend that people are dropping LyX as their tool of choice.
| >
| > Eh? are they dropping the CVS version because of this?
|
| No. "Ordinary users" don't use CVS. T
> | I know it is Not Nice, and I would like to to be Nice, too. But not to the
> | extend that people are dropping LyX as their tool of choice.
>
> Eh? are they dropping the CVS version because of this?
No. "Ordinary users" don't use CVS. They use the binary packages that comes
with their distr
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > How long to you want to wait?
|
| Until g++ 3.0 is shipping as default on major distributions would be not
| too far away, would it?
what about 2.95.x who long should we wait before distributions begin
to ship that?
| > Admins have now had a coupl
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I know it is Not Nice, and I would like to to be Nice, too. But not to the
| extend that people are dropping LyX as their tool of choice.
Eh? are they dropping the CVS version because of this?
Are they droppign 1.1.6fix2 because a bug in their own lib
> How long to you want to wait?
Until g++ 3.0 is shipping as default on major distributions would be not
too far away, would it?
> Admins have now had a couple of years to upgrade to 2.95.x, have they
> done so?
The ones in question have.
Andre'
--
André Pönitz ..
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I know there is some compile problem with the boost::crc, but that
>> is with _old_ C++ compilers. And before having an options for those
>> old compilers I want to know what is going wrong. (Not just: "It
>> ICE's. Revert!")
Andre> I
> I have found two bugs that I believe have not been fixed:
I put it on my to-do list.
Andre'
--
André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 11:33:44AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > | > Then convince me that there is a problem with the CVS version first!
| > | > (or the version in 1.1.6 for that matter)
| > |
| > | Reading 10M file with istream_iterator - 2.8 se
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | won't use the app. Darn easy isn't it?
| >
| > Yes, and since they don't use it we do not get bothered with bug
| > reports from substandard compilers.
|
| Did I mention that they do use 1.0.4/1.1.4/1.1.5?
Then you should be aware that all bug re
> Do you belive I disagree with any of this.
I did actually.
If you do agree, why do you put that much effort into this particular
feature? All the messages combined involved probably more typing than all
the lyxsum versions we had combined.
I know it is Not Nice, and I would like to to be Nice
> | won't use the app. Darn easy isn't it?
>
> Yes, and since they don't use it we do not get bothered with bug
> reports from substandard compilers.
Did I mention that they do use 1.0.4/1.1.4/1.1.5?
> No, I won't. I will continue to have hight expectaions, but will add
> fallbacks when we find
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 11:33:44AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > Then convince me that there is a problem with the CVS version first!
> | > (or the version in 1.1.6 for that matter)
> |
> | Reading 10M file with istream_iterator - 2.8 sec
> | Reading 10M file with ostrstream - 0.35 sec
Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 10:23:59AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > | > And _my_ checks with a bugfree lib shows that what is currently in CVS
| > | > is faster than the old version.
| > |
| > | Well Lars you always are a bit too hard, IMO. If you li
Hello Folks,
first off thanks for a great programm I use daily.
Version of lyx I use: 1.1.6fix2 compiled on a Redhat 7.1
I have found two bugs that I believe have not been fixed:
First Bug:
When using limits (shortcut Meta-M l) on a strukture ,ie an integral, the
limits are put in the right
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > I know there is some compile problem with the boost::crc, but that is
| > with _old_ C++ compilers. And before having an options for those old
| > compilers I want to know what is going wrong. (Not just: "It ICE's.
| > Revert!")
|
| I think _new_ com
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > It was the _old_ one that had the problem...
|
| I seem to remember a _really old_ C version of lyxsum that happened to run
| pretty quickly...
but most likely not faster than the istreambuf_version.
The problem with the old C version was that it m
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > I won't do this unless you can show me that it is unacceptable slow
| > with a bugfree libstd++!
|
| You can't expect everybody to update to a "bugfree" libstdc++.
|
| My old department over in Chemnitz seemingly still uses SuSE 6.something
| (2?,4?
> I know there is some compile problem with the boost::crc, but that is
> with _old_ C++ compilers. And before having an options for those old
> compilers I want to know what is going wrong. (Not just: "It ICE's.
> Revert!")
I think _new_ compilers and _new_ libs are ok. The problem is that not
e
> It was the _old_ one that had the problem...
I seem to remember a _really old_ C version of lyxsum that happened to run
pretty quickly...
Andre'
--
André Pönitz . [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I won't do this unless you can show me that it is unacceptable slow
> with a bugfree libstd++!
You can't expect everybody to update to a "bugfree" libstdc++.
My old department over in Chemnitz seemingly still uses SuSE 6.something
(2?,4?) and they are pretty happy with it. So they are a bit re
Edwin Leuven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > You didn't read my message regarding this?
|
| I read your message...
|
| > I really thing that we should avoid inheritance here.
| > (one thing is that we can store the spellchecker as a real object and
| > not as a pointer)
|
| You wrote:
|
| > _
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 10:23:59AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > And _my_ checks with a bugfree lib shows that what is currently in CVS
> | > is faster than the old version.
> |
> | Well Lars you always are a bit too hard, IMO. If you like your version
> | let it there, but please give
Dekel Tsur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 08:42:32AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
| > This seems to be caused by the "pure C++" method to do the checksum in
| > support/lyxsum.C.
| >
| > I'd certainly prefer C++ solution if it were viable, but in this case it
| > degrades p
> "Andre" == Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Andre> Since it just popped up on the user's list and I got a similar
Andre> complaint from a local LyX user last week:
Andre> This seems to be caused by the "pure C++" method to do the
Andre> checksum in support/lyxsum.C.
Andre> _Pleas
> You didn't read my message regarding this?
I read your message...
> I really thing that we should avoid inheritance here.
> (one thing is that we can store the spellchecker as a real object and
> not as a pointer)
You wrote:
> _OR_ perhaps more in the iostream fassion:
> (I think I like this
Juergen Vigna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 18-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > I won't do this unless you can show me that it is unacceptable slow
| > with a bugfree libstd++!
| >
| > And _my_ checks with a bugfree lib shows that what is currently in CVS
| > is faster than the old
On 18-Jun-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
> Oh, purlease!
???
> And while we're at it. Could you explain why we need more than one cursor
> anyway. This code (lots and lots of the code base actually) could do with a
> not-so-brief explanation of the rationale behind it. This goes for the
> front
On Mon, Jun 18, 2001 at 08:42:32AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote:
> This seems to be caused by the "pure C++" method to do the checksum in
> support/lyxsum.C.
>
> I'd certainly prefer C++ solution if it were viable, but in this case it
> degrades performance down to unusability on some machines (the
On 18-Jun-2001 Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> I won't do this unless you can show me that it is unacceptable slow
> with a bugfree libstd++!
>
> And _my_ checks with a bugfree lib shows that what is currently in CVS
> is faster than the old version.
Well Lars you always are a bit too hard, IMO.
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Since it just popped up on the user's list and I got a similar complaint
| from a local LyX user last week:
|
| This seems to be caused by the "pure C++" method to do the checksum in
| support/lyxsum.C.
no caused by buggy c++ lib.
| I'd certainly pr
Edwin Leuven <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Hi guys,
|
| I cleaned up the spellcheck code a bit; I took spellchecker.C and did the
| following:
|
| 1. put the ispell and pspell code in their own classes that inherit from a
| common spellbase class
You didn't read my message regarding this?
I
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Kalle, do you subscribe to lyx-cvs? If so, I won't post these redundant
| messages.
I am not sure if the lyx-cvs is really working right now...
But he should get it from cvslog.
--
Lgb
On 16-Jun-2001 Michael Koziarski wrote:
> 2) Test in many different browsers
I tested the entry page with:
- Netscape 4.77 (Linux)
- Opera 5 (Linux)
- Konquerer (Linux)
- Mozilla (Linux)
- IE 5.x (Win98)
and
- Lynx (Linux)
All of them display it perfectly! I guess you and Zvezdan did a really
On Monday 18 June 2001 08:18, Juergen Vigna wrote:
> On 15-Jun-2001 Angus Leeming wrote:
>
> > Well, the cursor knows it's paragraph, so we can call LyXCursor::par() to
> > obtain this info.
>
> LyXCursor is stateless!!! You have to get the right LyXCuror-struct to have
> the values filled out
John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Fri, Jun 15, 2001 at 06:49:11AM +0200, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > John Levon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | If a user enters a empty minibuffer input, it should be ignored IMHO
| >
| > Ok, this is good.
| >
| > _but_ should this be done
39 matches
Mail list logo
