Re: [AUCTeX-devel] TeX output dimensions in ConTeXt

[Mosè Giordano]

Hi Carlos,

2015-09-22 14:44 GMT+02:00 Carlos <address@hidden>:
>
> I'm having a problem with the frame output dimensions of the window.
> Or the output buffer of a file.
>
> This is something undesirable, not from an aesthetic point of view, but
> from  following up with errors, warnings, and the whole family, which
> results throughout the compilation of a document.
>
> It is a known fact, that TeX-source-correlate-mode is
> not to have a true value for mtxrun to perform inverse
> searches. It might be the case that it's a necessity for its LaTeX
> counterpart. It is also a known fact, that at least in one system,
> dbus-forward had problems.
>
> But the problem here are dimensions with the output window. Why? Because
> if I'm looking at an error, it's inconvenient to have to enter a greater
> than less than symbols,  or whatever you want to call them, to go to the
> top level of a file, or to the bottom level of said file.
>
> I want to go right to where the error is, and not wander around, because
> then, it no longer is convenient, and my fingers get tired.
>
> I'd  pretty much like to have my dear emacs, to display the error, right
> at level reach. Yes. like this : >> undefined control sequence, bla bla
> bla.
>
> And see it right away, instead of having to enter < or > to go top or
> bottom of buffers.
>
> Other than that, I can't complaint.
>
> TeX-correlate-mode is not necessary, although I have set it true in the
> initialization file.
>
> Okular is working flawlessly. C-c C-v is behaving accordingly.
>
> I just had to spread out some lines in context.el and added the option
> --synctex to context's TeX-command-list. Texec is working great
> too. Although in all honesty, except for documents that might have been
> compiled with that wrapper, is not known whether it is a good idea, to
> have it laying around. Why? I'll tell you why, because it is identified
> as ConTeXt but unfortunately points out to texexec. And this means that
> most new documents will not utilize the great features of lua as it is
> being implemented now.
>
> Anyhow, the above was just a rant I guess.
>
> (defun TeX-ConTeXt-sentinel (process name)
>   "Cleanup TeX output buffer after running ConTeXt."
>   (cond ((TeX-TeX-sentinel-check process name))
>         ((save-excursion
>            ;; in a full ConTeXt run there will multiple texutil
>            ;; outputs. Just looking for "another run needed" would
>            ;; find the first occurence
>            (goto-char (point-max))
>                       (re-search-backward "TeXUtil" nil t)
>                       (re-search-forward "another run needed" nil t)
>                       (message "%s" (concat "ConTeXt successfully formatted"
>                                             (TeX-current-pages)
>                                (message (concat "You should run ConTeXt again"
>                                                 "to get references right."
>                                                 (message "successfully 
> finished")))
>                                                 (TeX-current-pages)
>                                                 (setq TeX-command-Show)))))))
>
>
> in context.el

Indeed ConTeXt needs a sentinel function, but probably also a reliable
error parser, I'm not sure it can use `TeX-parse-error', or not?

> and the following
>
>     ("ConTeXt Full" "context --synctex %t"
>      TeX-run-TeX t
>      (context-mode) :help "Run ConTeXt until completion")
>
> in tex.el

Probably we already asked you, but what's wrong with default "ConTeXt
Full" definition in AUCTeX?

Bye,
Mosè