Lars Madsen <[email protected]> writes:
Hi Lars,
> On another note, I was hit by this
>
> \begin{enumerate}[a)]
>
> I have a macro that cleans up envs and sets \begin/end parts on lines
> of their own, attempting to leave any arguments alone.
>
> I my macro (with point at [) I'm attempting to jump to the matching ],
> but using (forward-sexp) this fails on
>
> [a)]
>
> leaving me at ) and I end up with
>
> \begin{enumerate}[a)
> ]
>
> Any advise on the proper method to go to a matching end?
The problem is that ( and ) have parenthesis syntax in AUCTeX buffers,
i.e., they are assumed to come in pairs. That's usually a sensible
assumption but fails in your concrete scenario.
What you could do is to change ('s and )'s syntax class to punctuation
instead of paren by doing
(modify-syntax-entry ?\( ".")
(modify-syntax-entry ?\) ".")
in the LaTeX mode hook. Of course, that has the drawback that now
forward-sexp won't jump over properly (parenthesized sentences like this
one).
A really correct approach would scan for such occurences of paralist's
enumerate/compactenum/etc with such special label definitions and add a
'syntax-table property to the ) and ( characters which uses standard
LaTeX syntax table with the entries for ?\( and ?\) changed like above.
However, that doesn't seem to be that easy. This for example is a valid
enumerate environment:
\begin{enumerate}[{A}-(i)))){]}][10]
\item foo
\item bar
\end{enumerate}
Basically, you have to take care that ] may also be contained in the
label spec if it's contained in a {} group, and there's also another
optional argument defining the maximum label width.
Bye,
Tassilo
_______________________________________________
auctex-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
