Hi all, I'm (very!) slowly sorting out some old discussions, now I'm back to simplification of the function for searching documentation.
My proposal is to keep `TeX-doc' as it is (maybe someone likes it, but to be honest I don't) and define a new, much much simpler function bound to "C-c ?" in place of it: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (defun TeX-documentation-texdoc () "Run texdoc to read documentation." (interactive) (message (shell-command-to-string (concat "texdoc --view " (TeX-read-string "View documentation for: " (thing-at-point 'symbol)))))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Ideas about the name are welcome :-) This function gets the symbol at point and uses it as initial input for `read-string', then simply runs "texdoc --view <given-string>", no more, as suggested also by Arash. I think it's fast and effective. A possible improvement could be to offer the list of alternatives, as "texdoc --list" does, when calling the function with a prefix argument. I tried to call "texdoc --list <string>" with `comint-exec' but it doesn't start the viewer, I suspect there is something wrong in `texdoc' (or in its interaction with `comint-exec') because other programs run with `comint-exec' are able to start external programs. Thus, I think we should parse "Data.tlpdb.lua" as suggested by Nicolas. Anyway, I'd add this feature later. Other suggestions? Objections against taking over "C-c ?"? Bye, Mosè 2015-12-16 22:22 GMT+01:00 Arash Esbati <esb...@gmx.de>: > Hi Mosè, > > Mosè Giordano <m...@gnu.org> writes: > >> am I the only one who finds `TeX-doc' overly complicated to the point >> it's sometimes useless? It fails to find documentation for many >> packages and classes, also pretty common ones like "babel", "fontenc", >> and "memoir". Wouldn't it better if it simply runs "texdoc NAME"? >> Aucompletion is cool, but in this case is often useless as the >> manual's basenames don't have to, and many times don't, match the name >> of the package. > > I agree. My suggestion is also to reduce this function to run "texdoc > NAME". `C-u TeX-doc' could run "texdoc -l NAME" and let the user choose > a number. I also agree that autocompletion is useless here. > > If I get it right MikTeX also includes "texdoc", so it seems to be > portable as well. > > Best, Arash > > > _______________________________________________ > auctex-devel mailing list > auctex-devel@gnu.org > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel > _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list auctex-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel