Hi Arash,
> Thanks for your response. This syntax is actually standard LaTeX, e.g.:
> \documentclass{article}
> \begin{document}
> \_
> \begin{tabular}[t]{@{}*{2}{l}r}
> 1 & 2 & some longish text \\
> 1 & 2 & some text \\ \hline
> \end{tabular}
> \_
> \end{document}
Oh, sorry. You are right. I should have tested more carefully.
> The lack of support for this was the main motivation for me to extend
> `LaTeX-array-count-columns'.
That seems to me an enough reason to do so.
> I think we are not closing that door. If someone wants to write a style
> for tabu.sty, he/she can (and probably should) go the route you're
> suggesting.
> In general, I also think that `latex.el' should support vanilla LaTeX,
> but since the overhead for `\begin{tabular}{X[foo = bar]}' support is
> quite low, I think we can leave it in `LaTeX-array-count-columns'.
I see. That's fine with me.
> I should also mention that one could write
> \documentclass{article}
> \begin{document}
> \_
> \begin{tabular}[t]{@{}*2lr}
> 1 & 2 & some longish text \\
> 1 & 2 & some text \\ \hline
> \end{tabular}
> \_
> \end{document}
> Note the missing braces around 2 and l. While LaTeX compiles this
> happily, my code chokes due to missing braces. But I consider this a
> feature :-)
> WDYT?
Hmm, this style is confusing. I think good LaTeX users should avoid
omitting braces like this example, so I agree that this should be
regarded as feature.
Bye,
Ikumi Keita
_______________________________________________
auctex-devel mailing list
auctex-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex-devel
