> 2015-08-23 22:50 GMT+02:00 Uwe Brauer <o...@mat.ucm.es>:
> Speaking for myself, I don't like code disappearing. Instead I like
> AUCTeX' approach: {sub,super}scripts are rendered as such but "^" and
> "_" (and braces) are still there.
Usually I agree, but in this specific case, I prefer to not see "^" and "_".
> I thought that adding another
> `substitute-patterns-with-unicode-symbol' would have overridden the
> one in `latex-unicode-simplified', but it doesn't seem to be the case.
> Then, redefining `latex-unicode-simplified' seems to be the way to go.
> Why? I'm not a hardcore TeX-fold-mode user, actually I seldom use it,
> I don't know why you say you have to do that.
Here is the scenario:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:new:1}
\int f(x)dx =0
\end{equation}
Now TeX-fold-buffer gives:
\begin{equation}
[l]
∫ f(x)dx =0
\end{equation}
So the integral is represented by its unicode symbol.
Now I modify the equation
\begin{equation}
[l]
∫ f(x)dx = \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}
\end{equation}
Sum is NOT represented this way, however when I run
TeX-fold-clearout-buffer, and then again TeX-fold buffer I obtain:
\begin{equation}
[l]
∫ f(x)dx = ∑_{j=1}^{∞}
\end{equation}
Can you reproduce this behavior? Don't you think that it is
inconvenient?
Uwe
_______________________________________________
auctex-devel mailing list
auctex-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
