From: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [lasgout...@lyx.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 6:27 AM
>I would revert the definition: "a buffer is hidden if it is internally
>opened in LyX, but not visible in any window" (rewritten into proper
>English)
Sounds good.
>> To make things really simple, what if
Le 22/08/2012 11:06, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
Do you really think that 'locally visible' and especially 'locally
hidden' have real use cases, or are they just added for the sake of
being complete? I would think that all/visible/hidden is good enough.
What do you mean by "visible" here? Are you
From: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [lasgout...@lyx.org]
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2012 4:12 AM
>Le 22/08/2012 09:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
>> + * \li Notion: A buffer is `locally visible' with respect to a view if it
>> + is visible within that view. If not, it is `locally hidden'.
>>
Le 21/08/2012 16:59, Richard Heck a écrit :
Since bug #7741 is very annoying for all external programs which do
not like having weird locale settings, I think this should eventually
go to branch.
When you feel it's ready.
Since getting testers on windows is more difficult, I will apply to
br
Le 22/08/2012 09:04, Scott Kostyshak a écrit :
I agree with the above points you made. LFUN_BUFFER_FORALL now supports
multiple views and I tried to add some structure on the terms "visible" and
"hidden", which are now defined in the LFUN documentation. The language is kind
of confusing, but I ca
From: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes [lasgout...@lyx.org]
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2012 4:45 AM
>The problem is that the LFUN is mixing real hidden buffers (visible nowhere)
>with the ones that are visible in some other window. I think these two things
>are very different from a user point of view.
>Conclusi
