[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Implementing TeX-update

From: Ivan Andrus
Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Implementing TeX-update
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2015 22:57:54 -0600

> On Sep 1, 2015, at 2:47 PM, Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2015-09-01 21:45 GMT+02:00 Tassilo Horn <address@hidden>:
>> Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:
>>>> And while we are at it: do you think "update" is the best term for
>>>> this feature?  IMHO, it's a too wide term, e.g., anything can be
>>>> updated and there's already `TeX-update-style' which has nothing to
>>>> do with that feature.  So maybe the terms "recompile" or just
>>>> "compile" would fit better?
>>> I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I tend to agree with you.
>>> I just followed the name suggested in our wishlist which also matches
>>> the proposed key binding `C-c C-u'.  Feel free to change the names
>>> (and key binding), if you feel like that.
>> Too bad the bindings for the only two better terms I can come up, i.e.,
>> _c_ompile and _r_ecompile, are already taken for _c_ommand and
>> _r_egion...
> Indeed we're running out of letters.  Letters still free should be:
>    a (u) x y
> Actually I'm not sure about "x".  Do you have ideas for "a" or "y"?

How about "all" or "yo, do everything dude".  :-)  Actually I kind of 
like all, though TeX-all isn’t a great name for the function.


reply via email to

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