* David Kastrup (2006-07-25) writes:
>>> Why is there no setting "nil"?
>>
>> Which semantics would such a setting have?
>
> No quote fontification.
>
>> `font-latex-quotes' currently tells font-latex which type of
>> guillemets is used. Consequently a setting of nil would mean to
>> disable fontification of guillemets and leave fontification of other
>> quotes activated. However, this seems kind of useless.
>
> Why? If documents don't use guillemets and the fontification gets
> garbled, why not have a way to turn it off?
Quote fontification can potentially go wrong on other quotation mark
types, too.
> Why is the variable
> called font-latex-quotes if it really only works on guillemets?
I didn't choose the name.
>> Uhh, I thought multi-char macros can only consist of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> They do.
>
>> There is quite some code in AUCTeX relying on this assumption.
>
> This is like \chapter*: the real macro is called \<, but if it is
> called with a suffix of < following it, the \WithSuffix definition
> gets used.
>
> suffix.sty is a fun little style file...
The following code seems to work quite fine even without suffix.sty:
\documentclass{article}
\def\<<{foo}
\begin{document}
\<<
\end{document}
That makes me a bit nervous.
--
Ralf
_______________________________________________
auctex-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
