* David Kastrup (2008-06-08) writes: > Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> Although the approach fails at the example mentioned above i looks more >> robust to me than what AUCTeX does, namely walking through the whole >> output and maintaining a stack of strings where some are file names and >> some are not. I thought about checking for file readability as well >> when pushing elements onto the stack but this would make deciding which >> names to pop from the stack much more difficult when a closing paren is >> found. > > My take on that is that we should not pop at all but rather record the > nesting level. And when trying to match, we go through the list, weed > out non-existing files and try matching on the existing ones, starting > with those that are "topologically close" in the nesting until we match > the actual error in question.
IIRC you suggested this before, but I don't see the benefit of recording all the file names, assuming the file name in question can be determined on demand (as done in tex-mode.el). -- Ralf _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
