Re: Re: math-macro scope

2002-04-08 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 09:53:35AM +0200, Guenter Milde wrote: > For the first problem, the "learnign" should be constrained to the active > buffer. (Well, I have too less insight into the LyX source (i.e. None) to > know how to implement this). I think I won't touch this for 1.2 anymore. > For

Re: Re: math-macro scope

2002-04-04 Thread Guenter Milde
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 15:03:20 +0200 wrote Andre Poenitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 03:00:31PM +0200, Guenter Milde wrote: > > When defining a math-macro in a document, LyX uses this definition for all > > other open documents as well (whether the macro is defined there or not) >

Re: math-macro scope

2002-04-04 Thread Andre Poenitz
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 03:00:31PM +0200, Guenter Milde wrote: > When defining a math-macro in a document, LyX uses this definition for all > other open documents as well (whether the macro is defined there or not) I know this. The current definition mechanisn isplainly wrong. > OTOH, when I put

math-macro scope

2002-04-04 Thread Guenter Milde
Dear LyXers, Some oddities: When defining a math-macro in a document, LyX uses this definition for all other open documents as well (whether the macro is defined there or not) OTOH, when I put the math-macros in a separate file (as the definition part is not really What I Mean, so I don't want