Mosè Giordano <[email protected]> writes: >> Why two alists and not just one with (FILE MD5 CHANGED) entries? > > Uhm, I think that would be a bit awkward: `TeX-run-TeX' updates md5 > hash without touching the changed status, instead `TeX-LaTeX-sentinel' > and `TeX-run-index' update the changed status without touching the > hash.
I don't see why this would be awkward. But another alternative was not to have the notion of CHANGED at all but to store entries of the form (FILE CURRENT-MD5 PREV-MD5). Then only `TeX-run-TeX' has to (setcdr entry (list new-md5 (cadr entry))) and nowhere else has the alist (or another one) to be modified. > That's why I kept those alists separated, but I can try to merge them > anyway. I actually don't have a strong opinion on this so feel free to keep it the way it is. >> Storing them buffer-locally in the master file's buffer would also >> work, no? > > Yes, but there is the same shortcoming as storing the variable locally > in idx file: the buffer shouldn't be killed, and as far as I know we > don't require master file's buffer to be always alive. That's right. Then I don't know anything better. Bye, Tassilo _______________________________________________ auctex-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
