[AUCTeX-devel] Re: preview-latex 0.9.1 and AUCTeX 11.whatever

[Jan-Åke Larsson]

David Kastrup wrote:
> Ah, that's the advantage of being project leader.  Unless developers 
> threaten to abandon ship because of it, I have nothing to fear. 
> Honestly, if you have a better idea of how to achieve this, feel free
> to do so.  It is apparent that I am getting fond of achieving stuff 
> with EMACS_LISP.

Yes. Verily. You do know you are preventing just about anyone else but
you from contributing to the configure stuff?

> > I've just started wondering if not the "getenv" elisp function
> > would be usable to transfer information from our configure script
> > to the emacs macro?
>
> Uh, transferring information from configure to EMACS_LISP works just 
> fine.  That's what the $4 and $5 arguments are for, and they do the 
> trick, including terrifying quoting characters and spaces.

Well, yes. What I am mainly concerned about is the readability of the code.

> The LISPIFY stuff is for transferring directory specifications _out_ 
> again, and in a form appropriate for substituting into *.el files.

Hmmmm. How about a "configure.el", to be used for the auto.el
(tex-site.el) generation? We would gain a configure.el file but it would
simplify aclocal.m4 considerably. Loading auto.el.in, exchanging @foo@
for some string and writing auto.el is simple in elisp. Calling it would
be simply '${EMACS} -batch -l configure.el' and input can be handled via
(getenv "foo").


We could actually be able to do all the emacs-related test in one emacs
run, print configure-style messages on stdout, and write output to auto.el
as well as into a file on the form
---------------
foo="bar baz"
export foo
---------------
to be sourced by the configure script which would set the related variables
in configure, later to be written into Makefile.

Problem is, this change would take somewhat <cough> longer than you'd like
right now, no?

/JÅ