Re: [AUCTeX-devel] a LaTeX-env-usepackage environment

[Tassilo Horn]

Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:

Hi Mosè,

> Any comments about this feature? :-) I'm sending a revised version of
> the patch, the major change is that you aren't prompted for options if
> no package is supplied.

I've had no time to test it so far, but the feature sounds quite useful
and I'm sure you've tested it yourself.  So just go ahead! (Some
nitpicking below.)

> +(defun LaTeX-arg-usepackage-get-packages-options ()

I'd rather name it `LaTeX-arg-usepackage-read-packages-with-options'.

> +  "Get the packages and the options for the usepackage macro.
> +
> +This function returns nil if no package is provided, a cons cell
> +otherwise, whose CAR is the list of packages, and the CDR is the
> +string of the options."

I'd rephrase the docstring so that it explains the normal case (packages
+ options read) first, and then the nil-case.

BTW, the name suggests that I can enter many packages.  Is that correct?
Or is that all due to the special case of

  \usepackage[options]{pkg1,pkg2,pkg3}

If so, I'd rather prefer to read just one package with it's options, so
that I'd end up with

  \usepackage[options]{pkg1}
  \usepackage[options]{pkg2}
  \usepackage[options]{pkg3}

and name the function accordingly, i.e., "package" (singular), when used
repeatedly.

Or it could allow entering multiple packages as it is now, but each
package with its own options.  And then it would return an alist
structurally equal to `LaTeX-provided-package-options'.

Bye,
Tassilo