On 04/17/2016 04:35 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 04:10:23PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
>
>> On 04/16/2016 04:01 PM, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>>> Le 24/01/2016 23:08, Enrico Forestieri a �crit :
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On
On Sat, Apr 16, 2016 at 04:10:23PM -0400, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 04/16/2016 04:01 PM, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> > Le 24/01/2016 23:08, Enrico Forestieri a �crit :
> >> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume
On 04/16/2016 04:01 PM, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 24/01/2016 23:08, Enrico Forestieri a �crit :
>> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Maybe we can go with the improvements you already
Le 24/01/2016 23:08, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Maybe we can go with the improvements you already made for beta, and commit
this particular patch to master
On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 07:30:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 24/01/2016 11:57, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>
> >>
> >>Thanks, I tested the patch and it works well. The new method
> >>GuiPainter::path method seems safe because it is very similar to other ones
> >>in GuiPainter. The
Le 24/01/2016 11:57, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
Thanks, I tested the patch and it works well. The new method
GuiPainter::path method seems safe because it is very similar to other ones
in GuiPainter. The other changes look ok, as for the symbol choice Richard
seemed positive about it. Please
Le 24/01/2016 23:08, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Maybe we can go with the improvements you already made for beta, and commit
this particular patch to master
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:12PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 19/01/2016 19:00, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 05:27:47PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>Le 19/01/2016 16:44, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>>On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37:23PM -0500, Guillaume
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 21/01/2016 05:19, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >
> >Please, find attached an updated patch that moves the check for
> >separators on mouse clicks to a centralized place (also accounting
> >for shift-clicks and other modifiers).
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 10:41:39PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 06:36:03PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> > Maybe we can go with the improvements you already made for beta, and commit
> > this particular patch to master after release.
>
> Fair enough. Please find
Le 21/01/2016 05:19, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 02:18:40AM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 03:03:20AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch
Le 19/01/2016 19:00, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 05:27:47PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 19/01/2016 16:44, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37:23PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Enrico: the width of the line of the plain separator changed, as
On Wed, Jan 20, 2016 at 02:18:40AM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 03:03:20AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> > Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> > >On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> > >
> > >>Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37:23PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>
> Enrico: the width of the line of the plain separator changed, as you can
> see, which I guess was not intended.
For the new symbol I used the width of 'n' instead of 'm'. As both kind
share the same base width, I tried to
Le 19/01/2016 16:44, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37:23PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Enrico: the width of the line of the plain separator changed, as you can
see, which I guess was not intended.
For the new symbol I used the width of 'n' instead of 'm'. As both
On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 05:27:47PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 19/01/2016 16:44, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37:23PM -0500, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>
> >>Enrico: the width of the line of the plain separator changed, as you can
> >>see, which I guess was not
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 03:03:20AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> >>Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>>On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:00:18PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 01/12/2016 06:53 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > What about a symbol like the attached one? It resembles a pilcrow with a
> > left pointing arrow.
>
> That looks good to me, and of course we don't want to rely upon color,
>
Le 18/01/2016 19:19, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 08:00:18PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
On 01/12/2016 06:53 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
What about a symbol like the attached one? It resembles a pilcrow with a
left pointing arrow.
That looks good to me, and of course
Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
However, this reveals new ways of creating an "after" cursor
Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
It is somehow better, but it is very strange because the behaviour is not
consistent: most of the time it selects the word before, but sometimes it
selects the separator (i.e. separator is removed if I type a key). I get the
second behaviour if I
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 03:23:31AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 16/01/2016 22:31, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:14:56PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> >>Le 16/01/2016 18:34, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:15:44PM +0100, Enrico
Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
However, this reveals new ways of creating an "after" cursor position:
* A visually-after cursor position appears with Ctrl+Shift+Arrows
(LFUN_*_SELECT_WORD of something like
Le 16/01/2016 15:52, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 14/01/2016 20:13, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:59:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
We might be speaking of two different issues:
* If I click on
Le 16/01/16 18:56, Guillaume Munch a écrit :
Ok. What does DEPM stands for?
Delete Empty Paragraph Mechanism. It is also the code that removes
double spaces.
JMarc
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 14/01/2016 20:13, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:59:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>
> >>We might be speaking of two different issues:
> >>
> >>* If I click on the right-hand half of the
On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>
> However, this reveals new ways of creating an "after" cursor position:
>
> * A visually-after cursor position appears with Ctrl+Shift+Arrows
> (LFUN_*_SELECT_WORD of something like this). It remains a right position
> after
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:15:44PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:40:21PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> > Maybe ¶ does not grow on you as it did on me, but ultimately it is going
> > to be your call.
>
> Maybe ¶ is also easier to implement and distinguishable
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>
> >>However, this reveals new ways of creating an "after" cursor position:
> >>
> >>* A visually-after
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:14:56PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 16/01/2016 18:34, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:15:44PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:40:21PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>>
> >>>Maybe ¶ does not grow on you as
Le 16/01/2016 18:34, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:15:44PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:40:21PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Maybe ¶ does not grow on you as it did on me, but ultimately it is going
to be your call.
Maybe ¶ is also
Le 16/01/2016 22:31, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 07:14:56PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 16/01/2016 18:34, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:15:44PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:40:21PM +, Guillaume Munch
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 03:03:20AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 16/01/2016 22:26, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Sat, Jan 16, 2016 at 06:29:32PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> >>Le 16/01/2016 17:06, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>>On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 07:45:35PM +, Guillaume
Le 14/01/2016 20:13, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:59:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
We might be speaking of two different issues:
* If I click on the right-hand half of the separator, the cursor moves
after the separator both visually and logically (a position
Le 13/01/2016 22:03, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:48:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Now I noticed that the "after" position can still be accessed with mouse
clicks at the end of the line. I imagine that there can still be many
commands that can produce this
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 03:59:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 13/01/2016 22:03, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:48:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> >>Now I noticed that the "after" position can still be accessed with mouse
> >>clicks at the end of the
Le 13/01/2016 01:00, Richard Heck a écrit :
On 01/12/2016 06:53 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:49:54PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
For the symbol itself, my suggestion was a very elongated version
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 06:40:21PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 13/01/2016 01:00, Richard Heck a écrit :
> >On 01/12/2016 06:53 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:49:54PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> >>>On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:48:41PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 12/01/2016 22:49, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >
> >Please, can you try the attached patch and report back whether it does
> >what you expect?
>
> It does, thank you. That was definitely the small issue that was the
> most
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>
> Dear Enrico,
>
>
> Thank you for the recent patches that took into account some of my remarks.
>
> I have been using master a lot recently and I noticed another issue
> which annoyed me: In 2.1, the behaviour when typing
On 01/12/2016 06:53 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:49:54PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>>
>>> For the symbol itself, my suggestion was a very elongated version of ⌟,
>>> meant to recall the plain
Le 12/01/2016 22:49, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Dear Enrico,
Thank you for the recent patches that took into account some of my remarks.
I have been using master a lot recently and I noticed another issue
which annoyed me: In
On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 11:49:54PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 03:04:33AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>
> > For the symbol itself, my suggestion was a very elongated version of ⌟,
> > meant to recall the plain separator inset. But, a character that
> > would match
Le 20/12/2015 17:31, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
Do you mean that you expect the parbreak separator to be used often on
purpose, instead of a plain separator, not just as the result of a
conversion 2.1 -> 2.2 ?
It is annoying repeating again all discussions made at the time those
insets were
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:57:23PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>
> I also have another bug to report (very subtle and better seen in
> combination with the view source panel). There seems to be two cursor
> positions before and after the separator, both being displayed before
> the separator.
On 01/09/2016 05:24 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
>>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> [...]
• Defect: They tend to accumulate and they are
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
[...]
> >>• Defect: They tend to accumulate and they are redundant because there
> >> is only one additional
On 01/09/2016 05:29 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:57:23PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
>> I also have another bug to report (very subtle and better seen in
>> combination with the view source panel). There seems to be two cursor
>> positions before and after the
On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 05:31:37PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 01/09/2016 05:24 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume
On Sat, Jan 09, 2016 at 05:32:17PM -0500, Richard Heck wrote:
> On 01/09/2016 05:29 PM, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:57:23PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >> I also have another bug to report (very subtle and better seen in
> >> combination with the view source
On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 06:57:23PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 12/12/2015 09:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >>Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >>>On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume
Le 12/12/2015 09:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
• Defect: The following character (parbreak separator) is not a
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> >
> >>• Defect: The following character (parbreak separator) is not a line
> >> break (the symbol is
Le 11/12/15 23:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
• Defect: They tend to accumulate and they are redundant because there
is only one additional '\n' in the LaTeX source. The problem is the
one can add one before another. Thus, two such consecutive chars
should be merged as a single one,
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 11:47:45PM +0100, Enrico Forestieri wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> > • Defect: I did not know about Alt+P Enter until very recently so
> > this feature has a discoverability issue, that Enter Enter Enter
> > appears to solve
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Dear list,
>
>
> I noticed various issues with the following new feature:
>
> Splitting of consecutive environments has been reworked and enhanced
>
> which is marked as "undocumente
Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 06:52:19PM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
Dear list,
I noticed various issues with the following new feature:
Splitting of consecutive environments has been reworked and enhanced
which is marked as "undocum
On Sat, Dec 12, 2015 at 12:34:47AM +, Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
> >This was documented at e521ee7b but the documentation was mostly removed
> >at 1c71f1ea.
>
> Silently losing work is very bad. I hope that you were not discouraged
> by the loss
Guillaume Munch wrote:
> Le 11/12/2015 22:47, Enrico Forestieri a écrit :
>>
>> This was documented at e521ee7b but the documentation was mostly removed
>> at 1c71f1ea.
>
> Silently losing work is very bad. I hope that you were not discouraged
> by the loss and will find the time to reintroduce
Dear list,
I noticed various issues with the following new feature:
Splitting of consecutive environments has been reworked and enhanced
which is marked as "undocumented" on the wiki. I was waiting for a
documentation to be sure that I understood what was going on before
exp
60 matches
Mail list logo
