On 04/04/2013 11:20 AM, Jordi Gutiérrez Hermoso wrote:
I just tried today to build at 16431:1766d8655006, and got
In file included from
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc:32:
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/lexer-octave-gui.h:29:34: error:
Qsci/qscilexeroctave.h: No such file or directory
In file included from
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc:32:
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/lexer-octave-gui.h:33: error:
expected class-name before '{' token
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc: In member
function 'void file_editor_tab::update_lexer()':
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc:215: error: cannot
convert 'lexer_octave_gui*' to 'QsciLexer*' in assignment
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc: In member
function 'void file_editor_tab::center_current_line()':
/oct-src/libgui/src/m-editor/file-editor-tab.cc:1169: error:
'class QsciScintilla' has no member named 'setFirstVisibleLine'
All of these seem to be related to my older version of QScintilla
(2.4). The cset that seems to have introduced at least part of the new
QScintilla features is
changeset: 16403:7fa90eb41240
user: Torsten<address@hidden>
date: Sun Mar 31 23:56:11 2013 +0200
summary: gui: individually configurable styles of the editor
lexers
More autoconf tests to check for QScintilla features, then?
There is apparently a variable defined for the presence of QScintilla:
#ifdef HAVE_QSCINTILLA
Can that be used?
Or can QScintilla be made a requirement? What is the reason for leaving
it out? An alternate editor?