Vincent Belaïche <vincent....@hotmail.fr> writes: > BTW I could not find the issue tracker at > https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/auctex, are you at all using an > issue tracker (or AUCTeX does not have any issues :-P :-DDD ).
We're currently using a plain mailinglist (bug-auc...@gnu.org). That's were bug reports sent with M-x TeX-submit-bug-report end up. The list is also accessible via Gmane: gmane.emacs.auctex.bugs. >> > - having the new argument for all LaTeX styles (I used a constant >> > LaTeX-dialect instead of hard-conding `:latex', as that seemed more >> > futureproof to me. >> > >> > - supporting (or ...) and (not ...) dialect expressions --- for >> > completeness I also added (and ...) >> > >> > - not sure whether this was a good idea, but I commonalized the dialects >> > list with equal value to a single instance for the sake of memory >> > saving (but this makes the code slightly more complex, and finally I >> > don't think that the saving worth it). >> >> I totally agree. Please make it go away! :-) > > Gone! Great! >> > + (add-hook 'bibtex-mode-hook 'TeX-bitex-set-dialect-hook) >> >> I don't like naming functions *-hook, and there's a "b" missing. >> `TeX-bibtex-set-LaTeX-dialect' would be fine. >> > Done, except that I named it > > TeX-bibtex-set-BibTeX-dialect > > because the matter is to set dialect to *BibTeX* (not LaTeX) when you > are in BibTeX mode. Yes, fine. I first thought it would set the LaTeX-dialect variable which I later saw it doesn't. > Well: this may mean that some of hooks will need to be allowing both > BibTeX and LaTeX dialects (actually I don't think so, as there do not > seem to be anything like BibTeX editing support in AUCTeX appart from > bib-cite which I don't know about. > > Please expect that you might see something looking like a regression > when editing BibTeX files if you rely on some style hook being active > in those files. At least I don't, but we'll see. >> `not' must only have one argument. Your `not' is probably a `nor'. We >> could just rename it to `nor' but I think making it a normal `not' >> would be better. > > I renamed it `nor' because I think that a user may want to pass > explicitly `(nor )' as the last argument of TeX-add-style-hook to > mean: > > Supported for *all* dialects > > as opposed to: > > I have coded this before Vincent did the patch, so the last > argument is missing. Yes, nil (omitted) should indeed mean "run with all dialects" but I don't see why this requires `nor'. The only place I found it is in the docstring of `TeX-add-style-hook' where you say that omitted is equivalent to (nor). You could also just say that it's equivalent to `(not (or))', no? To me it looks just a bit strange to have `and' and `or' but not a plain `not'. Do me a favor and just add a normal `not' that just delegates to `nor'. Bye, Tassilo _______________________________________________ auctex mailing list auctex@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex