maieul
Something wrong with \ledpb
The documentation says: "For example, if you call \ledpb at l. 444, then l. 443 will be at the p. n, and the l. 444 at the p. n + 1."
(You can delete the two occurrences of "the" by the way!)
With both v2.22.0 and v2.26.0a, I need to put the \ledpb one line later than documented (i.e. in this example, if I put it at the start of l. 444 then both lines 443 & 444 will be on p. n+1).
please provides a MWELe mardi 21 novembre 2017 à 23:15 +0000, Reuben Thomas a écrit :
The documentation says: "For example, if you call \ledpb at l. 444, then l. 443 will be at the p. n, and the l. 444 at the p. n + 1." (You can delete the two occurrences of "the" by the way!) This works as described in v2.22.0, but with v2.26.0a, I need to put the \ledpb one line later than documented (i.e. in this example, if I put it at the start of l. 444 then both lines 443 & 444 will be on p. n+1). — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.
I understand that, I filed a bug while it was fresh in my mind what the problem was. If it happens to be obvious, great; otherwise, I certainly am happy if you simply ignore it until I provide an MWE.
As it seems that it is a recent bug, I would be glad if you could send me a MWE before this week-end, as so far I could send quickly a patch.
Sorry I took so long to get around to this! However, I was able to reproduce the bug with the current git version of reledmac (same as release 2.26.6). I attach the MWE and its output.
I checked the documentation:
For example, if you call \ledpb at l. 444, then l. 443 will be at the p. n, and the l. 444 at the p. n + 1.
In the example, I call \ledpb at l. 7, so l. 6 should be at p. 1 and l. 7 should be at p. 2. In fact, l. 6 is at p. 2.