[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[AUCTeX-devel] Re: Happy Birthday 11.84

From: Ralf Angeli
Subject: [AUCTeX-devel] Re: Happy Birthday 11.84
Date: Tue, 05 Feb 2008 23:15:52 +0100

* Ralf Angeli (2008-01-12) writes:

> * David Kastrup (2008-01-12) writes:
>> Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> writes:
>>> 11.84 turns one today.  What do people think about releasing 11.85 in
>>> the near future?  Off the top of my head the only outstanding task would
>>> be relicensing AUCTeX to GPLv3.  Anything else?
>> I seem to remember that you wanted to have something
>> done/finished/whatever before doing that, but I don't quite remember
>> what it could have been.
> Font locking perhaps.  This certainly comprises the bulk of changes.
> There haven't been many reports about it, so either it behaves
> acceptably or nobody has used it.  I'll run some tests in other modes
> than LaTeX to check if it produces sane results as soon as I have time.

I just checked in a few little improvements to font locking.  It should
be more or less ready to be released.  However, it would be good if
people could give it a thorough beating before we do that.

My biggest fear at the moment is that the notation for specifying syntax
alternatives is not flexible or intuitive enough.  This is currently
done with a prefix notation.  So for example "|{\" means that the next
token could either be a TeX group ("{") or a macro ("\").  There is
currently only support for two alternatives.  If we wanted to allow more
than two this might become ugly, i.e. with the example above one would
have to write "|{|\_" meaning "{ or \ or _".

If you want to see some examples of the notation in action, check the
definition of `font-latex-built-in-keyword-classes'.  If somebody has a
suggestion for a better notation alternative I'd like to hear it.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]