bug#58005: 13.1.4; Can't work with indirect buffers
Hi all. I'm not sure what the ideal outcome is. It depends on each user's case. In principle, indirect buffers have identical text content as their base buffer, but different view properties, so the previews not showing in the indirect buffer agrees with this principle. I therefore, agree with Paul's comment. On your comment: > In theory, base buffer and cloned buffer can have different master file as > you say and the user can make use of that duality. However, the user must > remember which buffer has which master file in that case, between buffers > with identical contents. That doesn't seem a useful feature to me. This can be achieved by renaming the buffer accordingly, for example file.tex has master foo.tex and file.tex has master bar. Best, Vangelis On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 06:27, Ikumi Keita wrote: > Hi Paul and Vangelis, > > > Paul Nelson writes: > >> Ah, I see. Thanks for confirmation. I didn't try region preview. The > >> previews do appear in the indirect buffer if I type C-c C-p C-b etc. > >> > >> I expect you see what I described if you type C-c C-p C-d in the > >> indirect buffer. > > > OK, good -- we're on the same page then. > > > For whatever it's worth, in my opinion, this is the correct behavior: > > preview-document should not be responsible for indirect buffers, a bit > > like how it is not responsible for buffers having the given TeX-master > > that do not appear \include'd in that TeX-master's source. > > OK. Vangelis, what do you think about it? The same opinion? > > Regards, > Ikumi Keita > #StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine > #Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW > ___ bug-auctex mailing list bug-auctex@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
bug#58005: 13.1.4; Can't work with indirect buffers
Hi Vangelis, > Vangelis Evangelou writes: > Hi all. > I'm not sure what the ideal outcome is. It depends on each user's case. In > principle, indirect buffers have identical text content as their base > buffer, but different view properties, so the previews not showing in the > indirect buffer agrees with this principle. I therefore, agree with Paul's > comment. Thank you. Then I think AUCTeX can incorporate your proposal. Can you make an entry for doc/changes.texi and send the diff? To AUCTeX admins: Do you think Vangelis'es patch needs copyright assignment? In my opinion, it doesn't because definition of `TeX-buffer-file-name' is straightforward and other changes are trivial (replacements of `buffer-file-name' -> `TeX-buffer-file-name' or additions of `(with-current-buffer (or (buffer-base-buffer) (current-buffer))...') Regards, Ikumi Keita #StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine #Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW ___ bug-auctex mailing list bug-auctex@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
bug#70501: [PATCH] Fix preview bug involving long common suffixes
Hi Paul, > Paul Nelson writes: > These positions are recovered by Emacs using calls to search-forward > that always start at the beginning of line. The strings that should > identify the end of overlay2 also match the end of overlay1, hence the > bug. The fix is to bump the point forward, before searching, by just > enough so that the search must go beyond any previous position > identified on the same line. Thanks, pushed to the git repo. I'll close this bug. Regards, Ikumi Keita #StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine #Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW ___ bug-auctex mailing list bug-auctex@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
