Hi,
In tex-buf.el I see for example
("Use of [^ ]* doesn't match its definition." .
"It's probably one of the picture-drawing commands, and you have used
the wrong syntax for specifying an argument. If it's \\@array that
doesn't match its definition, then there is something wrong in an
@-expression in the argument of an array or tabular
environment---perhaps a fragile command that is not \\protect'ed.")
And this is triggered for example by this Plain tex file
\def\foo1{}
\foo.
\bye
But in the source for pdftex pdftex.web see at about line 9480
@ @<Report an improper use...@>=
begin print_err("Use of "); sprint_cs(warning_index);
@.Use of x doesn't match...@>
print(" doesn't match its definition");
help4("If you say, e.g., `\def\a1{...}', then you must always")@/
("put `1' after `\a', since control sequence names are")@/
("made up of letters only. The macro here has not been")@/
("followed by the required stuff, so I'm ignoring it.");
error; return;
end
I am of the opinion that AUCTeX should use the original Knuth
error messages.
Even for LaTeX the above error message is now really dated,
but this is not topic of this ticket.
I understand this is some work to extract from pdftex.web the
errors (perhaps someone in the last 30+ years or so has done so,
regarding the Knuth original messages, as pdftex adds some of its
own) and I am opening this bug ticket only for reference as for many
many years each time I have had errors playing around with
TeX I have always been slightly annoyed to see LaTeX specific
error messages. As a result, I most of the time execute etex or pdftex
in a Terminal bypassing auctex.
! Use of \foo doesn't match its definition.
l.27 \foo.
? h
If you say, e.g., `\def\a1{...}', then you must always
put `1' after `\a', since control sequence names are
made up of letters only. The macro here has not been
followed by the required stuff, so I'm ignoring it.
Best,
_______________________________________________
bug-auctex mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
