David Kastrup wrote on 13 Jan 2006 23:12:06 MET: > Patrick Drechsler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> David Kastrup wrote on 12 Jan 2006 10:09:47 MET:
[...] >>> And honestly: what do you expect short of magic? >> >> preview-latex is pretty close to magic IMO ;-) > > It is not like its history is not rife of examples where it was > first proven rigorously that a certain feature or performance > enhancement was technically impossible to do, followed by an > actual implementation. "floating point" vs "symbolic" math comes to mind ;-) But most of the time the problem is in front of the keyboard, not behind it. > With regard to the colored math example, there would be the > possibility to change LaTeX's notion of back- and > foregroundcolor, but that would not help with figures. And it > might be possible to just replace black and white color > selections with the Emacs fore&background. > > I am not sure those approaches are worth the pain, though. > Stuff that is really multicolored will look wrong in a colored > text window, no matter what you do. ACK. Although it's "cooler" to have ones default color scheme displayed, it might be worth some thought to display "preview-latex"-*images* (and maybe not stuff like section titles) with the print-version's background. Just a thought. Many people expect different response from software. David, Ralf et al are doing an excellent job at interpreting "what *I* want to see and do" with AUCTeX/preview-latex: Big pad on the back! Regards Patrick -- "Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it." --Richard Feynman _______________________________________________ auctex mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/auctex
