Hi Ralf, 2014-10-19 16:19 GMT+02:00 Ralf Angeli <[email protected]>: > * Mosč Giordano (2014-10-18) writes: > >> 2014-10-18 10:53 GMT+02:00 Piet van Oostrum <[email protected]>: >>> >>> The problem can be solved by changing the last cond part in LaTeX-newline >>> from >>> >>> (t >>> (indent-new-comment-line))) >>> to >>> (t >>> (newline))) >>> >> >> Thanks for the report! I can reproduce the bug and your change does >> indeed fix it, but I'm wondering whether applying it would cause side >> effects in other places, e.g. dtx files. Ralf, you wrote this >> function, what do you think? > > The change would indeed defeat the purpose of `LaTeX-newline'. If > `LaTeX-insert-into-comments' is t, the function makes sure that > inserting a line break in a comment will insert a comment starter in the > new line. You can test this with the following line in a LaTeX > document: > > % foo-!- > > The -!- marks the cursor position. If you call `LaTeX-newline' here, > you will get the following result: > > % foo > % -!- > > With the proposed change you'd get this: > > % foo > -!-
Thank you. I've just noticed also insertion of other environments, like itemize, gives weird results when `comment-auto-fill-only-comments' is non-nil. Does it make sense to let-bind this variable to nil when calling `indent-new-comment-line' in the line referenced by Piet? Bye, Mosè _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
