On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:30:43AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \) command,
rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an asterisk
in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in the .tex file get
turned
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:42:56AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
Talk about a pile of obfuscated crap! André would it be possible to turn
your math parser into a stand-alone TeX - LyX converter?
I believe so. Actually I have already spent some thoughts about it...
For starters: How do I add a
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 12:49:25PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Roll on André's TeX parser.
Perhaps Boost.Spirit might be a way to go?
Spirit is a parser framework written in C++.
Does it need fixed keywords or does it allow on-the-fly changes?
I pretty much doubt anything else than a
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 12:49:25PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| | Roll on André's TeX parser.
|
| Perhaps Boost.Spirit might be a way to go?
| Spirit is a parser framework written in C++.
|
| Does it need fixed keywords or does it allow
Andre Poenitz wrote:
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:30:43AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \)
command, rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an
asterisk in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in the
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:50:58AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| let alone some parser framework. Even if it is from boost.
I have no idea why we should support stuff like that anyway...
Because it is used in many disguises in regular .tex and it is not too hard
to get more or less
Andre Poenitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:50:58AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| | let alone some parser framework. Even if it is from boost.
|
| I have no idea why we should support stuff like that anyway...
|
| Because it is used in many disguises in regular
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 12:30:30PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
IMHO if we are going to support this it should be by an external tool
like reLyX.
We were talking about a stand-alone .tex-.lyx converter basing on the
current math parser code.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 12:30:30PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| At least the definition of active characters should be possible.
Regular tex or regular latex?
Both. ~ is active for starters...
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not have,
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:30:43AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \) command,
> rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an asterisk
> in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in the .tex file get
>
On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:42:56AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
> Talk about a pile of obfuscated crap! André would it be possible to turn
> your math parser into a stand-alone TeX -> LyX converter?
I believe so. Actually I have already spent some thoughts about it...
For starters: How do I add a
On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 12:49:25PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | Roll on André's TeX parser.
>
> Perhaps Boost.Spirit might be a way to go?
> Spirit is a parser framework written in C++.
Does it need fixed keywords or does it allow on-the-fly changes?
I pretty much doubt anything else
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Sun, Feb 02, 2003 at 12:49:25PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > | Roll on André's TeX parser.
| >
| > Perhaps Boost.Spirit might be a way to go?
| > Spirit is a parser framework written in C++.
|
| Does it need fixed keywords or does it allow
Andre Poenitz wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 01, 2003 at 01:30:43AM +, Angus Leeming wrote:
>> It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \)
>> command, rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an
>> asterisk in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:50:58AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | let alone some parser framework. Even if it is from boost.
>
> I have no idea why we should support stuff like that anyway...
Because it is used in many disguises in regular .tex and it is not too hard
to get more or less
Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 11:50:58AM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > | let alone some parser framework. Even if it is from boost.
| >
| > I have no idea why we should support stuff like that anyway...
|
| Because it is used in many disguises in
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 12:30:30PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> IMHO if we are going to support this it should be by an external tool
> like reLyX.
We were talking about a stand-alone .tex->.lyx converter basing on the
current math parser code.
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 12:30:30PM +0100, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | At least the definition of active characters should be possible.
>
> Regular tex or regular latex?
Both. ~ is active for starters...
Andre'
--
Those who desire to give up Freedom in order to gain Security,
will not
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still
| | think that this should be applied to 1.3.
|
| Then test test
On Sunday 02 February 2003 11:49 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still
| |
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| > | I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still
| > | think that this should be applied to 1.3.
| >
| > Then test
On Sunday 02 February 2003 11:49 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > | I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but
Angus Leeming wrote:
Angus Leeming wrote:
in which case we need
$macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)]\*?)|([a-zA-Z]+\*?)\s*)';
In fact, I believe that we can move the two '\*?' bits out of the 'or' to
give
$macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)])|([a-zA-Z]+)\*?\s*)';
Do you agree?
Talk about a
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
Get somebody else to test this and report back.
--
Lgb
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
Get somebody else to test this and report back.
What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
bug.
--
Angus
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
|
| | Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
|
| Get somebody else to test this and report back.
|
| What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
| bug.
just get somebody to test it.
I can confirm that Angus' minimal fix fixes the bug in the test case and that
it does not affect the parsing of real starred commands (\section*)
Is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Spitzmueller) writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| | What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
| | bug.
|
| just get somebody to test it.
|
| I can confirm that Angus' minimal fix fixes the bug in the test case and that
| it does
On Saturday 01 February 2003 2:07 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| | Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
|
| Get somebody else to test this and report back.
|
in the test case and
| that it does not affect the parsing of real starred commands (\section*)
|
| Is that enough?
A lot better :-)
Now it is ok.
Thanks Jűrgen. I'll apply it and mark Bug 9 as fixed.
--
Angus
I'm not very good at eating humble pie, but I feel I have to here :-(
Lars, the patch that I submitted to TeX.pm this afternoon broke reLyX when
tested with the other test cases in bugzilla. It didn't include the
trailing whitespace as part of the macro and reLyX therefore generated
tokens
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still think
| that this should be applied to 1.3.
Then test test test... you still have some days before 1.3.0 go out
the door.
We should create some testsuite kind of thing for this
On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
Angus Leeming [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still
| think that this should be applied to 1.3.
Then test test test... you still have some days before 1.3.0 go out
the
Angus Leeming wrote:
> Angus Leeming wrote:
>
>> in which case we need
>> $macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)]\*?)|([a-zA-Z]+\*?)\s*)';
>
> In fact, I believe that we can move the two '\*?' bits out of the 'or' to
> give
> $macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)])|([a-zA-Z]+)\*?\s*)';
>
> Do you agree?
>
>
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
Get somebody else to test this and report back.
--
Lgb
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> | Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
>
> Get somebody else to test this and report back.
What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
bug.
--
Angus
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
|
| > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| >
| > | Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
| >
| > Get somebody else to test this and report back.
|
| What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test
Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
> | bug.
>
> just get somebody to test it.
I can confirm that Angus' minimal fix fixes the bug in the test case and that
it does not affect the parsing of real starred commands (\section*)
Is
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Spitzmueller) writes:
| Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
| > | What's to test? The minimal fix works on the test case supplied with the
| > | bug.
| >
| > just get somebody to test it.
|
| I can confirm that Angus' minimal fix fixes the bug in the test case and that
| it
On Saturday 01 February 2003 2:07 pm, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> | > Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | > | Aren't I clever! Lars, may I apply this fix please?
> | >
> | > Get somebody else to test this and
| I can confirm that Angus' minimal fix fixes the bug in the test case and
> | that it does not affect the parsing of real starred commands (\section*)
> |
> | Is that enough?
>
> A lot better :-)
>
> Now it is ok.
Thanks Jűrgen. I'll apply it and mark Bug 9 as fixed.
--
Angus
I'm not very good at eating humble pie, but I feel I have to here :-(
Lars, the patch that I submitted to TeX.pm this afternoon broke reLyX when
tested with the other test cases in bugzilla. It didn't include the
trailing whitespace as part of the macro and reLyX therefore generated
tokens
Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still think
| that this should be applied to 1.3.
Then test test test... you still have some days before 1.3.0 go out
the door.
We should create some testsuite kind of thing for this
On Sunday 02 February 2003 1:41 am, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote:
> Angus Leeming <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> | I've reopened the bug and put the patch and test case there but still
> | think that this should be applied to 1.3.
>
> Then test test test... you still have some days before 1.3.0 go out
The bug:
It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \) command,
rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an asterisk
in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in the .tex file get
turned into \)'s. So it doesn't finish the math environment, and
Angus Leeming wrote:
in which case we need
$macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)]\*?)|([a-zA-Z]+\*?)\s*)';
In fact, I believe that we can move the two '\*?' bits out of the 'or' to
give
$macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)])|([a-zA-Z]+)\*?\s*)';
Do you agree?
Talk about a pile of obfuscated crap! André
The bug:
It turns out that reLyX thinks \)* is a starred version of the \) command,
rather than realizing that it's supposed to be \) followed by an asterisk
in plain text. (In case you're wondering, the $'s in the .tex file get
turned into \)'s. So it doesn't finish the math environment, and
Angus Leeming wrote:
> in which case we need
> $macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)]\*?)|([a-zA-Z]+\*?)\s*)';
In fact, I believe that we can move the two '\*?' bits out of the 'or' to
give
$macro = '(?:\)|([^a-zA-Z)])|([a-zA-Z]+)\*?\s*)';
Do you agree?
Talk about a pile of obfuscated crap!
If this feature is not needed any longer, I propose alternative 1. Alt 2
could be implemented as well for backward-compatibility (if this is really
necessary; the question is whether there are any users with selfmade
layout files that are not member of this mailing list)
Well me too would
> If this feature is not needed any longer, I propose alternative 1. Alt 2
> could be implemented as well for backward-compatibility (if this is really
> necessary; the question is whether there are any users with selfmade
> layout files that are not member of this mailing list)
Well me too
Hi,
when opening template letter.sty (among other), I get some strange
console messages:
LyX: Unknown tag `Latex' [around line 77 of file
~/Programme/lyx-1.2.0cvs-sol/share/lyx/layouts/stdletter.inc]
LyX: Unknown layout tag `Latex' [around line 78 of file
Michael Schmitt wrote:
when opening template letter.sty (among other), I get some strange
console messages:
i suppose it's letter.lyx ... ;-)
LyX: Unknown tag `Latex' [around line 77 of file
~/Programme/lyx-1.2.0cvs-sol/share/lyx/layouts/stdletter.inc]
LyX: Unknown layout tag `Latex'
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Herbert Voss wrote:
Michael Schmitt wrote:
when opening template letter.sty (among other), I get some strange
console messages:
i suppose it's letter.lyx ... ;-)
Of course. I typical case of rapid bug reporting :-)
Latex Latex
is not correct
Hi,
when opening template "letter.sty" (among other), I get some strange
console messages:
LyX: Unknown tag `Latex' [around line 77 of file
~/Programme/lyx-1.2.0cvs-sol/share/lyx/layouts/stdletter.inc]
LyX: Unknown layout tag `Latex' [around line 78 of file
Michael Schmitt wrote:
>
> when opening template "letter.sty" (among other), I get some strange
> console messages:
i suppose it's letter.lyx ... ;-)
>
> LyX: Unknown tag `Latex' [around line 77 of file
> ~/Programme/lyx-1.2.0cvs-sol/share/lyx/layouts/stdletter.inc]
> LyX: Unknown layout tag
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Herbert Voss wrote:
> Michael Schmitt wrote:
> >
> > when opening template "letter.sty" (among other), I get some strange
> > console messages:
>
> i suppose it's letter.lyx ... ;-)
Of course. I typical case of rapid bug reporting :-)
> Latex Latex
>
> is
56 matches
Mail list logo
