Sorry for delayed response. I have been traveling/otherwise occupied. David Kastrup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Evil Boris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> I do not follow your reasoning, but I have been acting jet-lagged >> the last several days [and had other excuses before that ;-]. I >> just suggest leaving all (math) previews alone, unless and until the >> point enters it and some modifications are made. At this point I >> suggest the preview bitmap gets nuked. > > I am not stupid. I understood your suggestion the first time. It has > the disadvantage that one of the most common ways of working with > previews is doing small edits and regenerating the preview. I was not commenting on your intelligence, but just trying to make use I was getting my point across. It's a personality glitch of mine that I tend to explain things too many times, sometime contradicting myself an odd number of times. :) > Basically your suggestion is to have a changed icon for modified > previews. There is merit to that suggestion, and the only drawback is > that we don't have artwork for it yet. Something like that. To be pedantic, for previews where the preview may no longer match the text under it. Hmmm... this suggests a somewhat different solution---leave the preview image alone, but mark it in some way to indicate it has beem modified. For example, underline it, put it in a colored frame, invert it, or whatever. Something not too obtrusive but visible. > Judging from past experience, > creating a set of icons in all supported sizes that is visually > appealing will take several days of work. If you want to volunteer > for that, you are welcome. I might be the world's worst choice for this particular job. Never built icons before and have a zilch of visual sense. >> By the way (and off topic for this thread): How come the usual >> (non-source-special) way of invoking, say, XDvi, does not require a >> confirmation (C-c C-c RET is sufficient) but working with source >> specials turned on you need to confirm the command line? > > Uh, is this so? Yep, seems to do this for me. Do not know why. No source specials => C-c C-c RET invokes preview. Yes source specials => C-c C-c RET offers a long command line to confirm. Odd. > They are made to match your text size. If this is not the case, then > your font setup is probably faulty and Emacs substitutes some other > font size, while the previews are made to match the size it could not > get. > > If you want your formulas scaled larger than the text, take a look at > the manual. I have mostly played with this on my Windows box. Since I never request any particular font (in .emacs or elsewhere) I tend to believe that Emacs gets the font it asks for. I might be wrong. The above was just my subjective impression. >>I also dislike mouse and menus of any sort (have menubar, toolbar, >>scroll bar, and balloons [eh... forgot the right term again] usually >>turned off). So various mouse menues attached to formula previews >>are not spectacularly useful for me personally. > > Why? The tooltip merely announces the presence of the menu on > mouse-3, but you need to click anyway to get the popup menu. And > C-mouse-3 will give a mode dependent popup menu anywhere in the > buffer. > > Or don't you even touch the mouse? If I am in Emacs I tend to use the keyboard exclusively. (Have menubar, toolbar, scrollbar turned off. At some point I also had tooltips turned off, not sure about now. Ah, due to a typo in my .emacs it is not off. I dislike Win tooltips. They sometimes pop up in strangest places (and times).) If I am not switching programs, I do not use the mouse (on my laptop, eraserhead... TrachPoint(TM)) at all. In other programs, I am sometimes forced to, as there is not equivalent keyboard command, or it's too twisted, or I do not remember what it was. Oh, well, enough of random ramblings, time to go back to Real World(TM). --Boris _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
