2014-11-26 12:57 GMT+01:00 Uwe Brauer <o...@mat.ucm.es>:
>
> Hi Mosè
> > Hi Uwe,
> > 2014-11-25 18:48 GMT+01:00 Uwe Brauer <o...@mat.ucm.es>:
>
> > I agree backward compatibility should be preserved as long as possible
> > (but not at any cost), but about what? Most users only customize
> > variables, don't fiddle with functions, if they write some elisp we
> > hope they're also able to read the doc string of a function and see
> > which are its arguments, if they've been changed. But please consider
> > the first version of a program (nor the second, the third, and so on)
> > is not perfect, when you develop it you arrive at a point in which you
> > must choose between keeping it bugged/broken, and fix it and break
> > compatibility (or fork it).
>
> My point is the following: if you improve a function or variable by
> adding more options it should be done, in my opinion, in way the user
> has not to change his old settings.
>
> > Regarding the change to `LaTeX-label', the whole point of it was to
> > let users choose to which environments label should be inserted. The
> > addition of the second argument was needed to discriminate between
> > environments and sections as suggested by Vladimir.
>
> I don't want to start this discussion again, since I also use reftex,
> my labels look typically
>
> \label{rem:fixpoint-scheme:2}
>
> Meaning that this is the second remark in the file called fixpoint-scheme.
> For
> me this is enough I wouldn't need to add more information like the one
> concerning the section, but I understand there are users with other needs.
>
>
> > Defaulting `prefix' to an empty string when no type is provided (in
> > order to make this argument optional) would defeat the whole
> > purpose of the change. Only defaulting `prefix' to nil wouldn't
> > break old codes using `LateX-label' function, but keeping the
> > second argument mandatory helps users be aware of the change of the
> > syntax of `LaTeX-label'.
>
> I had a look at the code and it is really a complete rewrite. From my
> philosophical point of view, the "appropriate" approach would have been
> to leave the second argument optionally not mandatory, and a user
> interested in this enhancement could consult the documentation and not
> the other way around: that the long-term-user gets an error and presumes
> a bug.
>
> Something like this.
> (defun LaTeX-label (name &optional type)
>
>
> > Moral: I'm not going to change `LaTeX-label'.
>
> Would you accept an (ugly) patch? (Also the changes that I do this any
> time soon are unlikely due to my workload and other priorities, such as
> the xemacs pkg sync.)
See the attached patch: this makes second argument optional but
doesn't change the spirit of LaTeX-label.
Bye,
Mosè
diff --git a/latex.el b/latex.el
index 80d2761..fa18167 100644
--- a/latex.el
+++ b/latex.el
@@ -941,7 +941,7 @@ either the prefix or a symbol referring to one."
(make-variable-buffer-local 'LaTeX-label-alist)
-(defun LaTeX-label (name type)
+(defun LaTeX-label (name &optional type)
"Insert a label for NAME at point.
TYPE can be either environment or section. If
`LaTeX-label-function' is a valid function, LaTeX label will
@@ -955,7 +955,9 @@ transfer the job to this function."
LaTeX-section-label
(and (listp LaTeX-section-label)
(cdr (assoc name LaTeX-section-label))))
- ""))))
+ ""))
+ ((nullp type)
+ "")))
label)
(when (symbolp prefix)
(setq prefix (symbol-value prefix)))
_______________________________________________
bug-auctex mailing list
bug-auctex@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
