Small fix: in RMLVO, use variant_idx to index variants instead of layout_idx
#475
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bluetech
approved these changes
Mar 23, 2024
|
No problem! Actually I didn't find the bug from using the API, just saw it while looking at the code, with the goal of understanding RMLVO. |
wismill
pushed a commit
to wismill/libxkbcommon
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 16, 2024
We accidentally ignored the variant index and used the layout index instead. In realistic rules they are always the same but don't have to be.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This pull request modifies a line of code in
xkbcomp/rules.c, in which themapping.layout_idxwas used to index thermlvo.variants.Is it correct that instead,
mapping.variant_idxshould be used here?Thanks