[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?
From: |
Mosè Giordano |
Subject: |
Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday? |
Date: |
Fri, 6 Nov 2015 11:48:48 +0100 |
Dear all,
I've put on hold the release process just to try and address the
problem with `LaTeX-fill-break-at-separators'. I don't think it's a
real showstopper, I mean, more people complained about the old
behavior than about the new one, but while we are at it it would be
nice to fix it.
Bye,
Mosè
2015-11-04 23:29 GMT+01:00 Mosè Giordano <address@hidden>:
> Hi David,
>
> how about having only the opening braces as default value, ie ? This
> keeps formulae in a single line, and somewhat preserves an acceptable
> filling as well.
>
> Bye,
> Mosè
>
>
> 2015-11-04 21:05 GMT+01:00 Tassilo Horn <address@hidden>:
>> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>>> So the "if they do not fit into one line" condition obviously broke
>>>> for some reason, and rather than even try figuring out what happened,
>>>> the functionality just gets squashed?
>>>
>>> Let me guess.
>>>
>>> commit 1f116b8499a0bd6081a473fb53dbf49ba49514cb
>>> Author: Tassilo Horn <address@hidden>
>>> Date: Fri Oct 9 07:54:51 2015 +0200
>>>
>>> Fill $...$ like \(...\) (bug#21645)
>>>
>>> * latex.el (LaTeX-fill-move-to-break-point): Fill $...$ like
>>> \(...\) (bug#21645)
>>
>> I think what has happened is that somehow the correct filling for
>> \(...\) and \[...\] broke at some point in time but no one noticed, and
>> I myself thought that this strange filling where there's a line break
>> after every inline math construct was intensional. Therefore I made
>> $...$ be filled consistently with \(...\) in the above commit.
>>
>> Because it seems many people seem to still use $...$ instead of \(...\)
>> now this "comb-style" filling attracted attention and users complained
>> which resulted in the change of defaults.
>>
>> Now I see that $...$ was probably filled correctly and \(...\) (and
>> likely alse \[...\]) was filled wrongly, so my commit fixed on the wrong
>> end. So feel free to revert that commit and the change of the default
>> value.
>>
>> Unfortunately, I can't estimate when I have time to look into this and
>> fix the right end of the breakage. This is my first week on a new job
>> [1], and on the weekend I have to do some work on our house which must
>> be finished before the wet and cold season starts.
>>
>> Bye,
>> Tassilo
>>
>> [1] ... and sadly I can't work on auctex during pauses there ...
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> auctex mailing list
>> address@hidden
>> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex
>>
- [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Uwe Siart, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, David Kastrup, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, David Kastrup, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, David Kastrup, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Tassilo Horn, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?,
Mosè Giordano <=
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/10
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, Mosè Giordano, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, David Kastrup, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, gojjoe, 2015/11/04
- Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?, David Kastrup, 2015/11/04