Hi Tassilo,
2014-02-20 8:40 GMT+01:00 Tassilo Horn t...@gnu.org:
BTW, the name suggests that I can enter many packages. Is that correct?
Or is that all due to the special case of
\usepackage[options]{pkg1,pkg2,pkg3}
Yes, it's that special case. I don't believe there are many packages
Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it writes:
I'm not sure I understood what you mean.
I think, I just misinterpreted your patch. Am I right that
`LaTeX-env-document' calls `LaTeX-insert-usepackages' which allows me to
insert as many \usepackage-Macros with individual options?
I think so, and
2014-02-20 22:53 GMT+01:00 Tassilo Horn t...@gnu.org:
Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it writes:
I'm not sure I understood what you mean.
I think, I just misinterpreted your patch. Am I right that
`LaTeX-env-document' calls `LaTeX-insert-usepackages' which allows me to
insert as many
Tassilo,
2014-02-14 19:03 GMT+01:00 Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it:
2014-02-14 16:31 GMT+01:00 Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it:
You might want to insert the `\usepackage's after the `\documentclass'
inside the `LaTeX-env-document' and I might agree, but that would
require some
Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it writes:
Hi Mosè,
Any comments about this feature? :-) I'm sending a revised version of
the patch, the major change is that you aren't prompted for options if
no package is supplied.
I've had no time to test it so far, but the feature sounds quite useful
Mosè:
Do you see the line (TeX-add-to-alist 'LaTeX-provided-package-options ? in
+(defun LaTeX-arg-usepackage-insert (packages options)
+ Actually insert arguments to usepackage.
+ (unless (zerop (length options))
+(let ((opts (LaTeX-listify-package-options options)))
+ (mapc (lambda
Hi Carlos,
2014-02-16 10:25 GMT+01:00 Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com:
Mosè:
Do you see the line (TeX-add-to-alist 'LaTeX-provided-package-options ? in
+(defun LaTeX-arg-usepackage-insert (packages options)
+ Actually insert arguments to usepackage.
+ (unless (zerop (length options))
+
As far as I can tell, you're using AUCTeX 11.87, but my patches are
against the git version in which there have been many changes,
including new functions and variables ;-)
Okay. Thank you for the clarification Mosè. I was about to send you another
message.
Take care.
Mosè:
I compiled the git version. That patch, One word: beautiful.
Take care Mosè, Tassilo, and everyone here. Have a good one!
___
auctex-devel mailing list
auctex-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
Mosè:
That was S-W-E-E-T!
Outstanding, and astonishing indeed!
As a side note, I had to replace all the LaTeX-environment-list-filtered by
LaTeX-environment-list, before AucTeX compiled
successfully. TeX-symbol-list-filtered did not have to be replaced.
Yes, but without a \documentclass you can't have a document environment,
so this is a special case.
How did I know, that that was going to be the sort of answer to justify
it? Hehehe, But yes, you are right Tassilo.
I could argue that no one
would dare to compile an acceptable LaTeX document,
Hi Carlos,
2014-02-14 15:34 GMT+01:00 Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com:
Yes, but without a \documentclass you can't have a document environment,
so this is a special case.
How did I know, that that was going to be the sort of answer to justify
it? Hehehe, But yes, you are right Tassilo.
I could
2014-02-14 16:31 GMT+01:00 Mosè Giordano giordano.m...@libero.it:
You might want to insert the `\usepackage's after the `\documentclass'
inside the `LaTeX-env-document' and I might agree, but that would
require some care and work. Is this what you want? I can try to
write down a patch for
And other than that, C-c C-e is for inserting environments, and
\usepackage is no environment, so even if it was convenient, it would
still be somehow wrong and astonishing.
Wrong and astonishing? hehe. That's a nice way to put it.. But you are
right: no need to reinvent the wheel.
Take care
Tassilo hello again:
I forgot to mention something, which was one of the reasons,
besides convenience, of using \usepackage bound to C-c C-e
If
\usepackage is no environment
What is the rationale to have
(defun LaTeX-env-document (optional ignore)
Create new LaTeX document.
The
Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com writes:
I forgot to mention something, which was one of the reasons,
besides convenience, of using \usepackage bound to C-c C-e
If
\usepackage is no environment
What is the rationale to have
(defun LaTeX-env-document (optional ignore)
Create new LaTeX
Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com writes:
No, it's completely unrelated. What you are referring to was a
problem with pdf2dsc that comes with Ghostscript that makes preview
fail.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.auctex.general/5035/focus=5058
Thank you! Excellent memory.
And thank you
Hello Mosè
non-trivial documents require more than one package to be loaded and
with different options (so can't be loaded with a single
`\usepackage{pkg1,pkg2,pkg3,...}', think about `fontenc', `inputenc'
and `babel').
Absolutely! And I agree with you. But no, that is not what I meant. To
Mosè hello again,
The purpose would be to either include the aforementioned usepackage
as an environment or somehow add it. Not only is a necessity, because If
you look at the macros available now, the list increases by the
day.
Perhaps having usepackage as an environment is not practical after
Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com writes:
Hi Carlos,
in LaTex-add-environments, then not only the usepackage would be bound
to the same keys, that is, C-c C-e, but each package would be
individually selected. Not only that, but you have the options readily
available.
For example, I just created
No, it's completely unrelated. What you are referring to was a problem
with pdf2dsc that comes with Ghostscript that makes preview fail.
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.auctex.general/5035/focus=5058
Thank you! Excellent memory.
And thank you for posting the link and saving me the time
Hi Carlos,
2014-02-09 12:48 GMT+01:00 Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com:
Sorry, I can't get what you mean by «document as an environment should
not be changed to class».
Hello Mosè.
My question is, is it feasible to have usepackage bound to `C-c
C-e`?
Normally, the default is documentclass,
Tassilo and Mosè:
Back in - let's see - April 2013 with the subject line Improve completion in
TeX-arg-document e LaTeX-arg-usepackage, it all boiled down that document as an
environment should not be changed to class. Although the question I have, is
slightly unrelated, at one point I was
Hi Carlos,
2014-02-06 Carlos linguafa...@gmail.com:
Tassilo and Mosè:
Back in - let's see - April 2013 with the subject line Improve completion in
TeX-arg-document e LaTeX-arg-usepackage, it all boiled down that document as
an environment should not be changed to class.
Sorry, I can't get
24 matches
Mail list logo
