Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: \\_> in tex-fold

[Masayuki Ataka]

From: Ralf Angeli <address@hidden>
Subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: \\_> in tex-fold
Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2005 13:06:17 +0200

> * Masayuki Ataka (2005-04-16) writes:
> 
> > In tex-fold.el, TeX-fold-region uses \\_> to match `the empty
> > string, but only at the end of a symbol'.
> >
> > (defun TeX-fold-region (start end &optional type)
> >  ... (snip)
> >                          (t
> >                           ;; "\\_>" is only available with Emacs
> >                           ;; 21.4 or later (checked into CVS Emacs
> >                           ;; on 2004-05-19). (This could be used in
> >                           ;; font-latex as well for
> >                           ;; `font-latex-match-variable-make' and
> >                           ;; friends instead of "\\>" and would fix
> >                           ;; issues with starred macros.)
> >                           (concat (regexp-quote TeX-esc)
> >                                   (regexp-opt item-list t)
> >                                   (if (string-match "\\_>" "X")
> >                                       "\\_>"
> >                                     "address@hidden")))))
> >
> > (1)
> > This comment is not correct, anymore.  "\\_>" is only available
> > with Emacs 22, and font-latex does not have
> > `font-latex-match-variable-make'.
> 
> In some sense it is still there.  The function is generated.
> 
Ah, yes!  I saw it in the macro font-latex-make-built-in-keywords.
Thanks.

> > (2)
> > (string-match "\\_>" "")
> > => 1
> >
> > This means
> >   $1\leq2$, $1\neq2$, $1\to2$
> > are not folded when we set TeX-fold-macro-spec-list for \leq,
> > \neq, and \to, respectively.
> 
> Hm, the problem is that numbers have word syntax which makes them part
> of a symbol.  I think word syntax for numbers generally is correct but
> this renders \\_> useless for the task at hand.
> 
> > But I don't have good solution to fix issues with starred
> > macros without "\\_>" Xp
> 
> I think we can simply remove \\_> from the code above.  The
> alternative with address@hidden should work as well; even with starred
> macros.

OK.  If we do not use "\\_>", we also do not need the comment for it.
Could you change it, or shall I do it?

best,
---
email: address@hidden
Name:: Masayuki Ataka // (Japan)