auctex-devel
[Top][All Lists]

## Re: [AUCTeX-devel] latex-pretty-symbols.el and subscripts (x-symbol): do

 From: Mosè Giordano Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] latex-pretty-symbols.el and subscripts (x-symbol): don't display _ or ^ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 19:07:22 +0200

Hi Uwe,

2015-08-23 17:26 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <address@hidden>:
> Hello
>
> I just found out that latex-pretty-symbols.el provides, at first glance,
> basically the same features as x-symbol-mode.
>
> However there is one small difference:
>
>     - both package display sub and superscripts actually one a
>       lower/higher position compared with the orginal line as in
>       $\int_a^b$, however x-symbol-mode does *not* display _ or ^,
>       while GNU emacs does. Can I customize this behaviour?

I hope it's clear latex-pretty-symbols' has nothing to do with AUCTeX
;-)  Anyway, the question is fairly easy to answer: looking to the
code it doesn't seem you can choose what to prettify and what not.
You can either redefine latex-unicode-simplified' without all
{sub,super}script entries or add a new function to the hook reverting
that change.  In the latter case, make sure the new function is
evaluated after latex-unicode-simplified'.  In package source code
there is the email address of the author: you could suggest him to
make some symbols optional.

Just out of curiosity, what's wrong with AUCTeX' fold mode?  At least,
when point is on a macro it's expanded to the real code and you can
edit it, with latex-pretty-symbol I find this less convenient.

Bye,
Mosè

`