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: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:35:40 +0200

2015-08-24 9:24 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <address@hidden>:
>
>> 2015-08-23 22:50 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <address@hidden>:
>
>
>> Speaking for myself, I don't like code disappearing.  Instead I like
>> AUCTeX' approach: {sub,super}scripts are rendered as such but "^" and
>> "_" (and braces) are still there.
>
> Usually I agree, but in this specific case, I prefer to not see "^" and "_".

I see, but with latex-pretty-symbol' only "^{1}" is prettified, not
"^{12}" for example, in my opinion its utility is limited.

>> I thought that adding another
>> substitute-patterns-with-unicode-symbol' would have overridden the
>> one in latex-unicode-simplified', but it doesn't seem to be the case.
>> Then, redefining latex-unicode-simplified' seems to be the way to go.
>
>
>> Why?  I'm not a hardcore TeX-fold-mode user, actually I seldom use it,
>> I don't know why you say you have to do that.
>
> Here is the scenario:
>
> \label{eq:new:1}
> \int f(x)dx =0
>
>
> Now TeX-fold-buffer gives:
>
> [l]
> ∫ f(x)dx =0
>
>
> So the integral is represented by its unicode symbol.
> Now I modify the equation
>
>
> [l]
> ∫ f(x)dx = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}
>
>
> Sum is NOT represented this way, however when I run
> TeX-fold-clearout-buffer, and then again TeX-fold buffer I obtain:
>
>
> [l]
> ∫ f(x)dx = ∑_{j=1}^{∞}
>
>
> Can you reproduce this behavior? Don't you think that it is
> inconvenient?

Actually you don't need to issue TeX-fold-clearout-buffer' before
TeX-fold-buffer', but this isn't the point.  IIUC, you'd prefer
automatic folding as you type, right?  I'm not aware of such a feature
and a quick look to the manual doesn't help me.

Pperhaps last Tassilo's commit has something to do with this topic
(not TeX-folding-mode though).

Bye,
Mosè