Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-12 Thread Asger Alstrup Nielsen
Asger seems to want to make extensive use of namespaces and to a certain extent I can see that as being a good way to enforce the notion of ownership to the various modules. So we could have a gui namespace and an Inset namespace among others. If we then use namespaces in our code we can

Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-12 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
"Allan" == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Allan Asger seems to want to make extensive use of namespaces and to Allan a certain extent I can see that as being a good way to enforce Allan the notion of ownership to the various modules. So we could Allan have a gui namespace and an Inset

Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-12 Thread Asger Alstrup Nielsen
> Asger seems to want to make extensive use of namespaces and to a certain > extent I can see that as being a good way to enforce the notion of > ownership to the various modules. So we could have a gui namespace and an > Inset namespace among others. If we then use namespaces in our code we >

Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-12 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Allan> Asger seems to want to make extensive use of namespaces and to Allan> a certain extent I can see that as being a good way to enforce Allan> the notion of ownership to the various modules. So we could Allan> have a gui namespace and

Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-08 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
"Allan" == Allan Rae [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Allan # We still need portability to other platforms of course but we Allan can draw a line and say "it must support namespaces" or Allan whatever else we desire. We can probably get away without Allan partial specialization of templates. Could

Re: Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-04-08 Thread Jean-Marc Lasgouttes
> "Allan" == Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Allan> # We still need portability to other platforms of course but we Allan> can draw a line and say "it must support namespaces" or Allan> whatever else we desire. We can probably get away without Allan> partial specialization of

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-29 Thread Amir Karger
On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 12:49:19PM +0200, Asger Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The Unicode.h file does not exist yet. Amir wrote an excellent script to Actually, my script is just good. I think only Keanu Reeves writes *excellent* scripts :) convert the unicode database to a C++ file, but the last

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-29 Thread Alejandro Aguilar Sierra
On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Asger Alstrup Nielsen wrote: The Inset base class. Unfortunately, I'm not feeling too well at the moment (something with my throat), so I have not done my homework yet. Sorry to keep you waiting for my proposal. Take your time. This is another very interesting part of

Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-03-29 Thread Allan Rae
On 29 Mar 1999, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: We need to introduce namespaces rather soon. Lgb Perhaps we should make a decision as to what compiler capabilities we require. By the time LyX-1.1 is finished and stable enough to release there will probably be another gcc released and egcs

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-29 Thread Amir Karger
On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 12:49:19PM +0200, Asger Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > The Unicode.h file does not exist yet. Amir wrote an excellent script to Actually, my script is just good. I think only Keanu Reeves writes *excellent* scripts :) > convert the unicode database to a C++ file, but the last

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-29 Thread Alejandro Aguilar Sierra
On Mon, 29 Mar 1999, Asger Alstrup Nielsen wrote: > The Inset base class. Unfortunately, I'm not feeling too well at the > moment (something with my throat), so I have not done my homework yet. > Sorry to keep you waiting for my proposal. Take your time. This is another very interesting part

Namespaces (was: string vs. LString)

1999-03-29 Thread Allan Rae
On 29 Mar 1999, Lars Gullik Bjønnes wrote: > We need to introduce namespaces rather soon. > Lgb Perhaps we should make a decision as to what compiler capabilities we require. By the time LyX-1.1 is finished and stable enough to release there will probably be another gcc released and egcs

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-28 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
Lars Gullik Bjønnes writes: LGB glyphType() decomposeGlyph(); lowercase(); uppercase(); titlecase(). Lgb

Re: string vs. LString

1999-03-28 Thread Lars Gullik Bjønnes
>> Lars Gullik Bjønnes writes: LGB> glyphType() decomposeGlyph(); lowercase(); uppercase(); titlecase(). Lgb