Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Float placement bug #1646

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jan 31, 2025
Merged

Float placement bug #1646

merged 11 commits into from
Jan 31, 2025

Conversation

FrankMittelbach
Copy link
Member

Internal housekeeping

Status of pull request

  • Ready to merge

Checklist of required changes before merge will be approved

  • Test file(s) added
  • Version and date string updated in changed source files
  • Relevant \changes entries in source included
  • Relevant changes.txt updated
  • Rollback provided (if necessary)?
  • ltnewsX.tex (and/or latexchanges.tex) updated

# Conflicts:
#	base/testfiles/tlb-fltrace-002.luatex.tlg
#	base/testfiles/tlb-fltrace-003.luatex.tlg
#	base/testfiles/tlb-fltrace-004.luatex.tlg
Copy link
Contributor

@car222222 car222222 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hope I found all the problems!
Rollbacks not checked.

When floats are placed onto the current or next page, \LaTeX{} makes
several tests to find an area that can receive the float. One of these
tests calculates how much space is already used on the page and how
much additional space is necessary to place the float in a particular
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

necessary ==> needed

variable and compared to thespace still available on the page.

If the test fails, the algorithm tries the next area. Unfortunately,
it reused the value in that internal variable as the starting point
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

it reused ==> it was reusing

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Really? I think 'it reused' feels OK

Copy link
Contributor

@car222222 car222222 Jan 31, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Or "it had been" even!

And maybe need to expand what "it" is here?
Thus:

Unfortunately, this will result in the reuse of the value . . .

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

new suggestion doesn't convey what I intended to say. was reusing is fine if you want that, but I'm not going to explain "it" :-)

Copy link
Member

@josephwright josephwright left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Subject to Chris's doc refinements

@FrankMittelbach
Copy link
Member Author

Subject to Chris's doc refinements

including those you do not agree with? Can you two please make up your minds?

@car222222
Copy link
Contributor

You expect us to agree!! ???

@josephwright
Copy link
Member

Subject to Chris's doc refinements

including those you do not agree with? Can you two please make up your minds?

I am not totally opposed to any of them - so merge once they are all done and we can see what happens when Barbara looks at the news :)

@car222222
Copy link
Contributor

So I was prompted to make a few further suggestions.

Copy link
Member

@davidcarlisle davidcarlisle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

with (either version) of documentation changes.

@FrankMittelbach
Copy link
Member Author

You expect us to agree!! ???

no, but one can still hope ...

@FrankMittelbach FrankMittelbach merged commit e4a1e65 into develop Jan 31, 2025
86 checks passed
@FrankMittelbach FrankMittelbach deleted the float-placement-bug branch January 31, 2025 14:12
@muzimuzhi muzimuzhi mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2025
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants