X-Git-Url: https://git.lyx.org/gitweb/?a=blobdiff_plain;f=src%2Fmathed%2FBUGS;h=7c95fa7b8af01bac1f19a6b8d3f883a63c12bcb7;hb=c1173eb11c5f218cd459924eb44276445c499069;hp=c4e263b71eed6d8b5a80bed41e72d97061f6bf6e;hpb=5ba91fecc48e629ef6c8437789d9b7e131ceced4;p=lyx.git diff --git a/src/mathed/BUGS b/src/mathed/BUGS index c4e263b71e..7c95fa7b8a 100644 --- a/src/mathed/BUGS +++ b/src/mathed/BUGS @@ -1,120 +1,39 @@ -Items marked with - - // - are probably fixed, the reporter is asked to verify this - and report success or failure - - ?? - are not reproducable, the reporter is asked to verify this - and report success or failure - - :: - are questions or comments to the reporter, containing question - on how to reproduce the bug exactly or things like that - - !! - mark "not a bug, a feature" replies, usually with a request for - further discussion - - pp - partially fixed - -Unmarked items are known unfixed but probably unverified bugs. - ----------------------------------------------------------------------- - -General hints for bug reports: - - - keep the items small - - - do not provide excessive information on how to reproduce the bug - if this is obvious - - - if a bug is partly fixed, report it as "fixed" and a new bug item - that contains the unfixed part only - - - check this list regularly, comment on the marked items. - - - plain ASCII text please, not much more than 70 chars per column - -Dekel: - -- InsetFormula::validate is broken - - Eran Tromer: - -- When selecting, maybe give a visual indication of the "original" +- When selecting, maybe give a visual indication of the "original" anchor, when it differs from the "actual" one. -Rainer Dorsch: -- I know the latex code of a lot of math symbols displayed by lyx, - but not all of them. Thus I have to use the math panel for only a single - symbol in a formula. I think it would be very useful, if the latex code - of the symbol would be displayed as a hint, if the mouse positioned over - it. +Álvaro Tejero Cantero +- I suggest creating a different "kewybinding namespace" for the formulas, + since you could put to good use all those keybindings from the menu (M-?, + C-?) thath currently do their job PLUS getting you out of the formula. + Seriously, it'd be great to have more keys free, so M-d t would be time + derivative and M-d ? derivative with respect to the variable ?. And so on. -Marcus (Suran@gmx.net) + Flattening macros. Sometimes it's annoying the fact that once you have + written a macro, you can't touch at it's "constant parts". I call flattening + to the process of substituting all macros with LaTeX code. -- In math-mode I can switch back to text-mode in a formula but then I am - not able to type Umlauts. + Task: designing a macro substitution system that reads from a file + (possibly the same file as the document's) the macros and parses the document + doing the appropriate replacements -- If the math-panel has the focus I can type text but not switch into - math-mode or use some of the other keyboard-shortcuts. + This is very useful, because sometimes you have a big expression in a macro + and you want to change an index only. What do you do then?. You retype + everything (perhaps several times in the document) or you create extremely + generic and parametrizable macros that aren't very fast to fill in the + majority of cases. -From: Álvaro Tejero Cantero - -- I suggest creating a different "kewybinding namespace" for the formulas, - since you could put to good use all those keybindings from the menu (M-?, - C-?) thath currently do their job PLUS getting you out of the formula. - Seriously, it'd be great to have more keys free, so M-d t would be time - derivative and M-d ? derivative with respect to the variable ?. And so on. - -- I'm no experienced C++ programmer, but if you consider it appropriate, I - could write a scritp in python for this one (I'm also very optimistic). Tell - me what you think: - - Flattening macros. Sometimes it's annoying the fact that once you have - written a macro, you can't touch at it's "constant parts". I call flattening - to the process of substituting all macros with LaTeX code. - - Task: designing a macro substitution system that reads from a file - (possibly the same file as the document's) the macros and parses the document - doing the appropriate replacements - - This is very useful, because sometimes you have a big expression in a macro - and you want to change an index only. What do you do then?. You retype - everything (perhaps several times in the document) or you create extremely - generic and parametrizable macros that aren't very fast to fill in the - majority of cases. - - -- cut&paste inside math-mode doesn't work the X fashion (middle button doesn't +- cut&paste inside math-mode doesn't work the X fashion (middle button doesn't paste anything). - -- I remember having heard that a search-replace function was planned, so I - won't repeat that. Only that the flattening option would be then easier to - implement on top of that. - -- Some math symbols aren't very well supported (to my knowledge). I'm - thinking of [] options. + Jules Bean: -a) If something's easy & quick in LaTeX then it should be easy & quick in -LyX (unless it really isn't very common). b) Actions which are used -frequently should be a single key-press, even if that's not very easy to -remember. You learn it. c) Actions which are used rarely should be -mnemonic -- easy to remember -- even if they are multiple keypresses. -Things you do rarely you care less about the time it takes to perform. - -As an aside, you may think that I'm whining over nothing. However, when -you enter math mode as often as I do (often more than once a sentence) it -gets very annoying, especially as compared to simply typing '$' in plain -emacs. Also, you may say 'why don't you just change your bindings file?'. I -will ;) but I wanted to start some discussion on this since it can benefit -everyone! - -More serious, though, than the number of characters which need to be typed +The number of characters which need to be typed is the confusing nature of the command. 'M-c m', typed once, puts you into math-mode. However, typing 'M-c m' again doesn't put you out of math-mode --- it puts you into math-text mode. Then hitting it again puts you back @@ -122,17 +41,17 @@ into normal math-mode. IMO, 'modal' keys should either be idempotent (so hitting it the second time does nothing) or self-inverting. In fact, the inverse to 'M-c m' is either 'ESC' or simply a space typed at the end of the block --- which is confusing, since they're not of the same 'shape' as -the command that got you in there. +the command that got you in there. Now, I'm not saying that 'space' shouldn't be allowed as a short-cut to get you out of math-mode; it's a most useful and natural one, I like it a lot. -However, on balance I think M-c m should also have that effect. +However, on balance I think M-c m should also have that effect. -3) Math-mode inconsistencies +3) Math-mode inconsistencies Sometimes 'the same action' has the same keystroke both within and without math-mode. This is very sensible. However, it is very annoying when -they don't behave the way you're expecting them to. +they don't behave the way you're expecting them to. For example, 'M-c e' puts you into 'emphasise' mode. Ignoring the fact that in text mode this is italics, and in math-mode it stands for the @@ -141,31 +60,31 @@ the fact that they have the same keys. However, in math-mode, 'M-c e' is idempotent, (and you need 'M-c space' to get back into normal) whereas in text-mode 'M-c e' is self-inverse. These are the two possibilities I listed as acceptable before, but consistency would be nice ;-) IMO, self-inverse -would be best for both. +would be best for both. -5) Proposal : a 'ligatures' or 'autocorrect' system +5) Proposal : a 'ligatures' or 'autocorrect' system One of the very minor, but useful, features of TeX is the way it lets you type the nearest approximation to what you want using a 'typewriter keyboard', and substitutes the typographically neat equivalent. In particular, 'fancy' quotes (") and en and em dashes (---). I propose that this UI element could be taken up a level into LyX, with a system that does -the following (for example): +the following (for example): --> becomes \rightarrow -<- becomes \leftarrow -=> becomes \Rightarrow (etc..) -==> becomes \Longrightarrow (etc..) +-> becomes \rightarrow +<- becomes \leftarrow +=> becomes \Rightarrow (etc..) +==> becomes \Longrightarrow (etc..) This may only be appropriate in math mode, of course. This family bug me in particular because they take ages to type using a \-escape. Undoubtedly sharp minds will think of others, and also we need some way of actually -typing those sequences as literals when we want them. +typing those sequences as literals when we want them. -6) Scope macros: +6) Scope macros: The current macro system is clever, but could be neater. One improvement -I'd like is to let LyX know about TeX's scoping rules... +I'd like is to let LyX know about TeX's scoping rules... Yves Bastide: