Re: [AUCTeX-devel] New tex-symb.el

[David Kastrup]

Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> writes:

> * David Kastrup (2007-02-04) writes:
>
>> Now the principal idea of X-Symbol's operation has been the
>> replacement of control sequences like \"a in the buffer with ä and
>> in particular doing so for a large number of mathematical symbols
>> (implemented via separate fonts), and this kind of operation is
>> bound to inserting the actual symbols, not corresponding control
>> sequences.
>
> AUCTeX supports substitution of math macros with characters from
> UTF-8-enabled fonts through folding.  Also implemented by Masayuki.

Yes, but folding is quite different.  X-Symbol actually puts the
respective character (IIRC, not necessarily a Unicode character) into
the buffer.  It remains a single character when doing things like
delete-character-forward or adding letters after it.  The conversion
is only done when reading/writing the file.

That part of X-Symbol is not appealing to me, but it is not available
separately from the input mechanisms (I should not be calling them
"input methods" since they are independent, and quite more than the
usual stuff).

>> The input methods are just an "additional" functionality.
>>
>> So the input methods would need some working over in order to only
>> insert symbols that are known to work with the current document
>> encoding, and use the TeX transliteration otherwise.  Or always
>> insert the transliteration.
>
> As far as I understand the code in tex-symb.el, it supports
> insertion of the transliteration and folding it instantly.

I don't see the point you are trying to make.  How is it relevant?  I
was not talking about the folding/replacement part of
tex-symb/X-Symbol, but rather about the _input_ sequences.

>> I think it would make sense to steal the (really well-designed)
>> input method functionality from X-Symbol.
>
> There was the restriction that only one input method can be
> activated at a time, IIRC.  So we should check if it is sensible to
> use one in AUCTeX without interfering with others which could be
> used in parallel.

Sigh.  I think we have a terminology problem here.  Please check out
<URL:http://x-symbol.sourceforge.net/details.html#insertion>, or
actually X-Symbol itself (just don't use it for editing and saving
files for which you have no backup if you want to be careful: all that
automatic conversion can be worrying).

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum