Arash Esbati writes:
Hi Arash,
>> Why is that needed? As far as I see, that function only complains
>> about variables defined by AUCTeX itself which you can also defvar,
>> no?
>
> Yes, the complaints about free variables `TeX-*' vanish by defvar'ing
> them.
That's good.
>> In
> Arash Esbati writes:
> Indeed, the code in tex-font.el is really outdated. And that's the
> reason I thought I just silence the compiler without touching it.
Ah I see. Then I'm fine with your proposal. I agree that it isn't worth
taking care of tex-font.el.
Regards,
Ikumi Keita
Hi Keita,
Ikumi Keita writes:
>> Arash Esbati writes:
>> tex-math-face defined in tex-font.el doesn't specify a custom group.
>> Any objections if I apply this patch in order to pacify the compiler?
Thanks for your response.
> I think that the patch itself is harmless. At the same time,
Hi Tassilo,
Tassilo Horn writes:
> Arash Esbati writes:
>
> the defvars look good to me.
Thanks for checking.
> Why is that needed? As far as I see, that function only complains about
> variables defined by AUCTeX itself which you can also defvar, no?
Yes, the complaints about free
Arash Esbati writes:
Hi Arash,
the defvars look good to me.
> @@ -1188,15 +1233,16 @@ entry in `TeX-view-program-list-builtin'."
> (error "PDF Tools only work with PDF output"))
>(add-hook 'pdf-sync-backward-redirect-functions
> #'TeX-source-correlate-handle-TeX-region)
>
Hi Arash,
> Arash Esbati writes:
> tex-math-face defined in tex-font.el doesn't specify a custom group.
> Any objections if I apply this patch in order to pacify the compiler?
I think that the patch itself is harmless. At the same time, I feel that
we should overhaul tex-font.el if
