Ikumi Keita <ik...@ikumi.que.jp> writes: >>>>>> David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> writes: >>> Are you thinking that it isn't fruitful to follow up the development of >>> ghostscript every time incompatible change is introduced? > >> No since the changes tend to be completely arbitrary. It's absolutely >> not fruitful but exasperating. That doesn't mean that it's not >> necessary. > >> In this particular case, this is partly related to _not_ using >> GhostScript as PDF interpreter but instead using pdftodsc and then >> working with the resulting not-quite-standard PostScript. This >> minimises the amount of knowledge and code required to make this work >> but necessitates working with interfaces of Ghostscript that its >> developers feel no obligation to provide some consistency for. > >> Changing the operation in a manner foregoing pdftodsc would likely make >> preview-latex less vulnerable to this kind of recurring API change. > > I infer from what you wrote that you don't have intent to fix the > problem for yourself, at least for now. Right?
It never was a problem for myself since my windows are black on white. This code is for people who expect preview-latex to do something more useful than the default on other setups. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-auctex mailing list bug-auctex@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex
