Ikumi Keita <ik...@ikumi.que.jp> writes: >>>>>> Arash Esbati <ar...@gnu.org> writes: > > Oh, I didn't know \tabularnewline. Thanks.
Sure, welcome. And while we're at it, I add fontification support for the macro to AUCTeX repo. >> I think we should treat \tabularnewline like \\ and \newline and >> \linebreak like \par. Does it make sense? > > Well, I'm still not sure the reason why \par and \\ are treated > specially, so I can't provide reliable answer for \\ v.s. \newline and > \tabularnewline. (Maybe Ralf has answer.) > > With respect to \par v.s. \linebreak, I guess that the reason why \par > is exceptional is that \par is supposed to end a paragraph and usually > comes at the end of line, without a following empty line. Emacs built-in > facility to recognize paragraphs (namely, `paragraph-start' and > `paragraph-separate') cannot deal with such construct, so > `LaTeX-fill-region-as-paragraph' pays special attention to it, I think. > > On the other hands, \linebreak just tells LaTeX that "I ask (or allow, > depending on the value of its optional argument) to break line here" and > does not mean the end of the paragraph. > > Thus I don't think it's reasonable to treat \linebreak like \par. Fine with me :-) >>> On the other hands, it may be make sense to include lines ending with >>> \\ in filling outside such environments. > >> You mean check the current environment every time during filling? > > That's the reason I inserted "may" ;-) As you know, LaTeX-current-environment might become expensive on large buffers, hence my question. Best, Arash
