Michael Gronover
Michael Gronover
This implies we do not have enough or the right test cases.
That would be much clearer and nicer i fully agree. Do you see a way to stay backward compatible (the methods `allowUmlaute` and `allowParagraph` would become obsolete, won't they)?
Okay, I think we should go ahead here first and create a new ticket for that approach. Reasons: 1. Nobody asked for more flexibility (maybe everyone silently accepted the situation...
I just do not know what is missing here. The tracing is performed during interpretation of a DSL. Everything shown in the TraceExplorer was already evaluated i. e. traced. So...
This commit is cherry picked into the branch "datev-loon-staging-20213" (right now).
@arimer both points were intended by customer [ticket](https://gitlab-extern.itemis.de/customer_datev/lodas/-/issues/1018). According to the type cast: well it is safe to write node:Type in this case, are there concrete reasons to do so?
> The `default`-part of the `DataTableLookUp` cannot be deleted, when the cursor is placed on the `default` keyword. Deleting from the `=` and from eg. first position of the value...
Though the main part is done by PR #1034, there is a further minor bug: The focus is not set if the first selected TraceExplorer entry is below a lambda...
The points above are solved with PR #1040.
@enikao is master really the correct target branch?