Timeline for How does one use option CellGroupingRules?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31, 2019 at 5:56 | comment | added | Alexey Popkov | @ihojnicki Please comment what was changed in CellGroupingRules in the last version under this question: "Any manual on cell grouping management? | |
| May 31, 2019 at 5:54 | comment | added | Alexey Popkov | Strongly related: "Any manual on cell grouping management? | |
| May 31, 2019 at 5:35 | answer | added | Carl Woll | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:58 | comment | added | ihojnicki | @b3m2a1 I cannot speak on the Paclets stuff, that is far outside of my sphere of influence, and I only have so much spare time. | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:57 | comment | added | ihojnicki | @b3m2a1 AttachedCell will be promoted to a System symbol (I cannot commit to an exact version number). BackgroundAppearance will be phased out at some point, hopefully merging into Background. It's fate hasn't been decided yet. | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:55 | comment | added | ihojnicki | @b3m2a1 IIRC, we actually made changes to CellGroupingRules in the last year or so. We generally try to not smash things to bits without a good reason, but we are just not willing to commit to a smash-less future for some. | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:23 | comment | added | b3m2a1 | @ihojnicki on the other hand, I do understad that when Stephen is feeling capricious nothing can stand in his way. Like the Paclet stuff, for example, that in the live streams he's expressed an interest in completely changing up in potentially breaking ways. | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:21 | comment | added | b3m2a1 | @ihojnicki I mean yes, but for something CellGroupingRules that's been around so long and used so often it would seem a little capricious to remove. AttachedCell I have no expectation will remain, BackgroundAppearance for Cell I have no expectation will remain, but CellGroupingRules seems as if it's probably safe given how often it's been used here and within WRI's own stylesheets. | |
| May 28, 2019 at 2:18 | comment | added | ihojnicki | @b3m2a1 it normally means that the design and/or behavior was never officially approved. While potentially useful, they do not come with a guarantee of compatibility with future FrontEnds. | |
| May 27, 2019 at 18:03 | comment | added | b3m2a1 | When they say "This option is not yet fully integrated into Wolfram Language" for most FE constructs that's actually not true... This has been around for many versions unchanging and is used everywhere. If they changed it they'd have a huge headache on their hands. On the other hand, for these FE constructs there definitely is as dearth of documentation. | |
| May 27, 2019 at 15:14 | answer | added | Andrew Norton | timeline score: 0 | |
| May 27, 2019 at 11:20 | history | asked | Andrew Norton | CC BY-SA 4.0 |