When we export the file to latex, we use the redefinition_ variable to check whether we should output newcommand or renewcommand. This variable was set by the MathMacroTemplate::metrics() function, and this caused problem when the export is running in a different thread as the GUI.
In general, the metrics() functions should not change the Buffer; we have updateBuffer/updateMacros for that purpose.
Not all accessors did update the data previously. Therefore it could happen
that document export from the command line would output \newcommand, and from
GUI it would output \renewcommand for the same macro, simply because in the
GUI case the data was updated as a side effect of the GUI thread reading some
other member.
I also removed the mutable flag for requires_, since this member is always
set on construction and does not need any lazy update.
This is mostly unused private class members.
There are also a few unused functions that got #if'ed out. I never know in this case whether the code should be nuked.
False positive rate of hints is quite high. Although the includes can be
technically removed (due to other includes) they logically belong to the
header.
each failure.
There are several places I was not sure what to do. These are marked
by comments beginning "LASSERT:" so they can be found easily. At the
moment, they are at:
Author.cpp:105: // LASSERT: What should we do here?
Author.cpp:121: // LASSERT: What should we do here?
Buffer.cpp:4525: // LASSERT: Is it safe to continue here, or should we just return?
Cursor.cpp:345: // LASSERT: Is it safe to continue here, or should we return?
Cursor.cpp:403: // LASSERT: Is it safe to continue here, or should we return?
Cursor.cpp:1143: // LASSERT: There have been several bugs around this code, that seem
CursorSlice.cpp:83: // LASSERT: This should only ever be called from an InsetMath.
CursorSlice.cpp:92: // LASSERT: This should only ever be called from an InsetMath.
LayoutFile.cpp:303: // LASSERT: Why would this fail?
Text.cpp:995: // LASSERT: Is it safe to continue here?
As discussed on the list. No automatic contents detection is done, the user
needs to use the special paste menu instead. I used the new TempFile class
for safe temporary file handling.
The documentation would go into section 2.2 of UserGuide.lyx, but I am not
allowed to edit that document.
worth doing, as we were creating too much output for tooltips anyway.
But we need to ignore BibTeX insets altogether, as the collection of
the references, etc, is too slow.
so we can write a limited amount when using this for TOC and
tooltip output.
This should solve the problem with slowness that Kornel noticed,
which was caused by our trying to write an entire plaintext
bibliography every time we updated the TOC. We did that because
he had a bibliography inside a branch, and we use plaintext for
creating the tooltip that goes with the branch list.
Other related bugs were fixed along the way. E.g., it turns out
that, if someone had an InsetInclude inside a branch, then we would
have been writing a *plaintext file* for that inset every time we
updated the TOC. I wonder if some of the other reports of slowness
we have received might be due to this kind of issue?
Somehow I overlooked that \sideset also supports nonscript arguments for
left and right. This is now fixed, although I do not like the toolbar names.
If somebody knows something better, please improve.
The toolbar image is the one Uwe attached to the bug report. Note that
\sideset works only for operators like \sum in the nucleus. LyX allows
any content, so you might get a LaTeX error. I don't know how to prevent
wrong content in the nucleus.
Some macros defined by wasysym.sty work only in text mode: They either
produce an error in math mode, or wrong output. These symbols are now marked
as text symbols, so that no \ensuremath is created for LaTeX export if they
appear inside \text{}, and the correct images are created.
Actually, the test case showed several problems:
- ERT insets did use layout "Standard", not "Plain Layout"
- The font scale was read correctly, but tex2lyx claimed that it did ignore
the option "scaled=0.95"
- If a third argument of the CJK environment was given, it caused the whole
environment to be put in ERT with a broken encoding. This is now fixed for
the bug test case by using the \font_cjk header variable, but the encoding
problem still exists for unsupported encodings. I'll file a separate bug
for that.
- The CJKutf8 package was not handled in the preamble parsing. Therefore the
chinese comment in the preamble was read with a wrong encoding, and guessing
the document language did not work.
The new file CJKutf8.tex was created by copying and modifying CJK.tex, but
unfortunately it is impossible to tell git to inherit the history of CJK.tex
for the new file (search the web for git svn copy if you want to know details).
The fix is basically mechanical, the additional code for fraction like insets
with three arguments was stolen from \unitfrac. As any math package,
stackrel.sty needs a buffer parameter to switch it off.
I also added the two stackrel flavours to the toolbar.
stmaryrd.sty sets these symbols up as variable size math delimiters (i.e.
they may be used with \left and \right). Now LyX knows about that and offers
them in the delimiter dialog as well as single symbols.
The stmaryrd package adds support for lots of math symbols, using a font
designed to accompany the computer modern fonts. The changes in detail:
- Fix generate_symbols_list.py to work with stmaryrd.sty. It loooks like it
was automatically translated from a perl version and never used.
- Generate the new symbols in lib/symbols using generate_symbols_list.py and
add some manual adjustments
- Generate stmary10.ttf by a simple ttf export from stmary10.sfd with fontforge
- Add license info for stmary10.ttf
- Create a test file with all symbols from stmaryrd.sty. Actually it would be
nice to have this for the other fonts as well.
- The mechanics: lyx2lyx, tex2lyx, font machinery etc.
This patch puts all projects into subfolders (at least for MSVS). In this
way, there is a better overview (especially if the number of test projects
will be increasing).
