[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [AUCTeX-devel] patch for the documentation concerning prettifying an

From: Uwe Brauer
Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] patch for the documentation concerning prettifying and friends
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2016 19:11:44 +0000
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux)

   > Uwe Brauer <address@hidden> writes:

   > Uh, you use a git <-> mercurial bridge?  At work, I'm shortly before
   > doing it the other way round. ;-)

Yep, it works like charm. I use mercurial now for most of my LaTeX
documents and I prefer it much  over git, but then I preferred
Xemacs over GNU emacs for a long time and git reminds me of GNU emacs as
mercurial reminds be of Xemacs, and the fate of the later is well known

   > The super/subscript thingy doesn't belong here.  It's a plain
   > font-latex.el feature and has nothing to do with prettify.el.  The
   > relevant custom option `font-latex-fontify-script' is already described
   > in the manual section "3.1.3 Fontification of mathematical constructs",
   > so please update its description there instead of distributing it in
   > different sections.

Hm, I see your point, but there is one point to keep in mind. I think
today Auctex is the standard Emacs package for any serious LaTeX editing, (well
there is vanilla GNU emacs LaTeX mode and there is cdlatex mode, but the
later is a minor mode compatible with auctex, while the former well I
don't know who the heck could use it.)

Be it as it may, I think it would be good if the auctex.texi had some
section describing all sort of SEMI WYSIWYG stuff.

So what's about the following idea:
I do the changes you suggest but I add a short section entitled say.
(Semi) WYSIWYG features in which I mention

    -  preview 

    - prettifying

    - and the Fontification of mathematical constructs",

And the links to the relevant sections.

I find such a section helpful. Sometimes it is not only important what
is explained but how it is visually organised.

   > Please remove the description of how x-symbol did it for XEmacs and the
   > problems it had.  I don't think a comparison is not what a manual is
   > about.  Feel free to blog about the topic.

   > And what about not being able to deleting prettified symbols?  Of course
   > you can, it's just that this will just delete one character and not the
   > complete macro that gets displayed as a pretty symbol.

Here is what I mean: \alpha --> prettified α 

 ^cursor, I hit backspace

I obtain \alph

And the prettifying of this symbol is for course disabled.

The point is I «see» a char, namely the prettified α, and expect  to delete it
like any char using  backspace (or delete) but I cannot since \alpha is just
represented not converted to α.

   > As said above, that should go into "3.1.3 Fontification of mathematical
   > constructs", and please update it with all possible values of the
   > variable, that is, the old values nil and t plus the two new values
   > `invisible' and `multi-level'.


   > Thanks,

So before I submit a new patch please tell me what you think.


reply via email to

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