auctex-devel
[Top][All Lists]

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

 From: Uwe Brauer Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] latex-pretty-symbols.el and subscripts (x-symbol): don't display _ or ^ Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 20:50:40 +0000 User-agent: Gnus/5.13001 (Ma Gnus v0.10) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux)

>>>>> "Mosè" == Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Uwe,
> 2015-08-23 17:26 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <address@hidden>:

> I hope it's clear latex-pretty-symbols' has nothing to do with AUCTeX
> ;-)

Point taken, I sometimes (ab)use the auctex mailing list as a general
list for editing latex files in (X)emacs, which would include reftex,
cdlatex x-symbol etc.

I also thought that the issue of sub and superscripts is a general
feature of GNU emacs, however in the context of latex files it is the
most relevant, but now I understand that the super subscript issue is of
more special character as the following paragraph suggests.
Or in other words it is not possible in general to make the _ and the ^
disappear, which is sad and ugly.

> 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.

Right, what I miss most know is the inverse function of
latex-unicode-simplified.

> 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.

I tend to disagree, see my comments below, however I agree: a inverse
function to  latex-unicode-simplified would be convenient.

As for AUCTeX fold mode: first of all in Xemacs it does have the
features that are present  in GNU emacs: replacing (using overlays?) math
constructs such
as \int really by its (unicode?) Symbols.

However I consider the fold mode as being  inconvenient. When
I modify a formula I have to toggle all the time
TeX-fold-buffer
and
TeX-fold-clearout-buffer.

Uwe

`

reply via email to