Stefan Monnier | 1 Mar 06:15 2007
Picon

Re: Usage of install.el

>>> One could achieve this with a two-step approach of creating a package and
>>> then installing it, of course.
>> 
>> Yes.  Although right now there's no code to actually *create* a package ;-)

> I know, and I am wondering if install.el would be the right place for
> including that functionality because the creation of a package can be
> very special.

Agreed.  Which is one of the reasons why there is no such code right now.

        Stefan
Stephan Hennig | 1 Mar 19:10 2007
Picon

Re: Can autctex support metapost?

David Kastrup schrieb:
> Stephan Hennig <mailing_list <at> arcor.de> writes:
> 
>> BTW, a question that may sound dumb, but what exactly is AUCTeX in
>> technical terms? Is it a major/minor mode (I don't think so), a set
>> of lisp macros with key bindings or something completely different?
> 
> Major modes for plain TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, Texinfo and some
> off-the-wall formats.

Ah, thanks.  Searching the AUCTeX manual for 'major' returned nothing,
which left me confused.  I suggest not only speaking of 'modes', but
'major modes' in the manual.  Or is 'mode' conventional Emacs
terminology for 'major mode'?

Best regards,
Stephan Hennig
Reuben Thomas | 1 Mar 23:48 2007

Please support \SaveVerb (fancyvrb)

This looks to be quite simple: currently, LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims 
(the variable) is processed with regexp-opt, while if you allowed regexps in 
LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims, you'd just have to treat it as a list of 
regexps. Whether this would be sufficiently efficient, I don't know. The 
case for \SaveVerb might warrant special treatment, as it just needs to 
match

\SaveVerb{<appropriate-pattern-for-box-name>}

as a verbatim command.

I'm using AUCTeX 11.83, but I checked the changes for the latest version and 
didn't spot any mention of this sort of functionality.

--

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org/ | Fasting Alleviates Concupiscence Effortlessly
Ralf Angeli | 2 Mar 22:11 2007
Picon

Re: Please support \SaveVerb (fancyvrb)

* Reuben Thomas (2007-03-01) writes:

> This looks to be quite simple: currently, LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims 
> (the variable) is processed with regexp-opt, while if you allowed regexps in 
> LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims, you'd just have to treat it as a list of 
> regexps. Whether this would be sufficiently efficient, I don't know. The 
> case for \SaveVerb might warrant special treatment, as it just needs to 
> match
>
> \SaveVerb{<appropriate-pattern-for-box-name>}
>
> as a verbatim command.

Why don't you use `LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-braces'?

--

-- 
Ralf
Ralf Angeli | 2 Mar 22:31 2007
Picon

Re: Please support \SaveVerb (fancyvrb)

* Reuben Thomas (2007-03-02) writes:

> On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Ralf Angeli wrote:
>
>> * Reuben Thomas (2007-03-01) writes:
>>
>>> This looks to be quite simple: currently, LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims
>>> (the variable) is processed with regexp-opt, while if you allowed regexps in
>>> LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims, you'd just have to treat it as a list of
>>> regexps. Whether this would be sufficiently efficient, I don't know. The
>>> case for \SaveVerb might warrant special treatment, as it just needs to
>>> match
>>>
>>> \SaveVerb{<appropriate-pattern-for-box-name>}
>>>
>>> as a verbatim command.
>>
>> Why don't you use `LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-braces'?
>
> Because \SaveVerb uses delimiters, not braces:
>
> \SaveVerb{boxname}|verb text|

I see.

--

-- 
Ralf
Reuben Thomas | 2 Mar 22:13 2007

Re: Please support \SaveVerb (fancyvrb)

On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Ralf Angeli wrote:

> * Reuben Thomas (2007-03-01) writes:
>
>> This looks to be quite simple: currently, LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims
>> (the variable) is processed with regexp-opt, while if you allowed regexps in
>> LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-delims, you'd just have to treat it as a list of
>> regexps. Whether this would be sufficiently efficient, I don't know. The
>> case for \SaveVerb might warrant special treatment, as it just needs to
>> match
>>
>> \SaveVerb{<appropriate-pattern-for-box-name>}
>>
>> as a verbatim command.
>
> Why don't you use `LaTeX-verbatim-macros-with-braces'?

Because \SaveVerb uses delimiters, not braces:

\SaveVerb{boxname}|verb text|

--

-- 
http://rrt.sc3d.org/ | Caution Children At Play Drive Slowly (Anon)
Ralf Angeli | 3 Mar 19:04 2007
Face
Picon

Autoloads for RefTeX

Hi,

the current installation instructions for RefTeX tell the user to put
autoloads for some entry functions manually into the user's init file.
I don't really like this because it is prone to fail when functions
move, it clutters the init file, and it unnecessarily exposes the
implementation of the package.  So it generally is somewhat clunky.

IMO a better approach would be to generate during installation a file
containing autoloads which the user then may load from the init file
in a similar way we currently do this for AUCTeX and preview-latex and
how install.el does it.  The file could even be part of the
distribution.

In contrast to AUCTeX and preview-latex I'd like to install the
autoloads file in the same location as the Lisp files of RefTeX.  If
RefTeX is installed into its own directory the file could be named
autoloads.el for example.  If RefTeX does not get its own directory we
should probably pay a bit more attention and use something like
reftex-autoloads.el (not sure about 8.3 file systems in both cases) or
try to find a file where we could append the autoloads.  Is there a
convention regarding autoloads?  Any other suggestions?

--

-- 
Ralf
Carsten Dominik | 3 Mar 20:21 2007
Picon
Picon

Re: Autoloads for RefTeX

Two things to keep in mind:

1. RefTeX uses a maybe non-standard way to load the different
subfiles like reftex-cite.el etc.  It does not do (require 
'reftex-cite).
Instead, reftex.el does contain autoload forms for all necessary entry
points of all other files.  I did this when I split the one big
original file into many small ones, and back then I did not know a 
better
way to do this.  As a consequence, is it possible that not all necessary
entry points in the different files do have an ;;;###autoload cookie.
It might be necessary to add these, starting from the autoload forms
in reftex.el.

On Mar 3, 2007, at 19:04, Ralf Angeli wrote:

> Hi,
>
> the current installation instructions for RefTeX tell the user to put
> autoloads for some entry functions manually into the user's init file.
> I don't really like this because it is prone to fail when functions
> move, it clutters the init file, and it unnecessarily exposes the
> implementation of the package.  So it generally is somewhat clunky.

Fully agreed

>
> IMO a better approach would be to generate during installation a file
> containing autoloads which the user then may load from the init file
> in a similar way we currently do this for AUCTeX and preview-latex and
(Continue reading)

Ralf Angeli | 3 Mar 20:37 2007
Picon

Re: Autoloads for RefTeX

* Carsten Dominik (2007-03-03) writes:

> Instead, reftex.el does contain autoload forms for all necessary
> entry points of all other files.

Yep, I saw those calls to `autoload'.

> I did this when I split the one
> big original file into many small ones, and back then I did not know
> a better way to do this.  As a consequence, is it possible that not
> all necessary entry points in the different files do have an
> ;;;###autoload cookie.  It might be necessary to add these, starting
> from the autoload forms in reftex.el.

Good point.  I'll do a clean-up ... (c:

> On Mar 3, 2007, at 19:04, Ralf Angeli wrote:
>
>> IMO a better approach would be to generate during installation a file
>> containing autoloads which the user then may load from the init file
>> in a similar way we currently do this for AUCTeX and preview-latex and
>> how install.el does it.  The file could even be part of the
>> distribution.
>
> Instead of during installation, it could be done during creation
> of the distribution package.

Yes, that's what I meant with the last sentence in the paragraph
above.  The advantage of this approach is that RefTeX could still be
installed manually on systems where `make' is not available.  What I
(Continue reading)

Ralf Angeli | 4 Mar 14:04 2007
Face
Picon

Re: Autoloads for RefTeX

* Carsten Dominik (2007-03-03) writes:

> I guess an alternative could be to make reftex.el a small file
> with only autoloads and basic setup, and then have a reftex-base.el
> with the current content of reftex.el.

It would be nice if we could rename reftex.el to reftex-base.el
without losing the change history and start changing stuff from
there.  Oh well ...

--

-- 
Ralf

Gmane