Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * David Kastrup (2006-01-14) writes: > >> Ralf Angeli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> * David Kastrup (2006-01-13) writes: >>> >>>> Didn't we actually fix this particular one yet? Hmm. Seemingly not. >>>> A sort of "least invasive" change would be: >>> [...] >>>> -)+\\( \\|\r?$\\)\\|\ >>>> +)+\\([ >]\\|\r?$\\)\\|\ >>> [...] >>>> Butt-ugly. What we probably should do instead is to keep a list of >>>> every (xxx combination and every ) in any context, and then whenever >>>> we actually match with source lines, we try to figure out which of the >>>> ( and ) actually made sense. Yes, this does not sound like too much >>>> fun. >>> >>> I'd rather poke myself with a stick in the eye. >> >> Ah, but the overall goal is not to maximize your private level of >> happiness. > > Yeah, but mine is. Now please hand me a stick.
No fun for me. >>> I saw that you already checked in the change. If it is working like >>> that, i.e. with a general solution, we could just keep it. >> >> "With a general solution"? What's that supposed to mean? > > That's how I understood your change in preview.el. Doesn't it prevent > preview-latex from choking on "(PNG copy)"? (As I've mentioned > before, I cannot check it.) No, it prevents preview-latex from choking on "(PNG copy)>" by letting it misunderstand "(PNG " and letting it recover by misunderstanding "copy)>" again. The problem is what kind of opening parens and what kind of closing parens we are going to take as gospel. I don't see a sane way around accepting "(PNG ", so I have to accept ")>" as well given that we have to deal with the [expletive deleted] new output ideas from PDFTeX. It is not like AUCTeX is the only TeX shell with that problem, so I consider this a bit of an inconsideration on part of the PDFTeX developers. >>>> Which reminds me: we should have the error/line style error >>>> messages work out as well. >>> >>> "as well" like in "_both_ file/line/error _and_ normal messages >>> should work"? >> >> Have you taken a look at file/line error messages? They don't >> replace the standard messages but sneak in an _additional_ line. >> We just need to make our error message patterns skip this >> additional line. > > Ah, now I got it. Besides the stick you may hand me a pair of > scissors for shortening my long line. (You need me not to say that > the outprint "a long line to have" not in English exists.) I am afraid that this play on German will be incomprehensible to most readers of this group. Including myself, by the way. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
