David Kastrup writes:
>>> I strongly recommend to include the code in Auctex, maybe with a
>>> additional variable, something like this
>>
>> It's far from perfect. For example, if you have some spurious ^ or _
>> somewhere in your text (not in some math) you won't see it at all.
On 09/03/2015 11:49 AM, Tassilo Horn
wrote:
Uwe Brauer writes:
> I strongly recommend to include the code in Auctex, maybe with a
> additional variable, something like this
It's far from perfect. For example, if you have some spurious ^ or _
Uwe Brauer writes:
> On 09/03/2015 11:49 AM, Tassilo Horn wrote:
>
>
> Uwe Brauer writes:
>
>> I strongly recommend to include the code in Auctex, maybe with a
>> additional variable, something like this
>
> It's far from perfect. For example, if you have
Uwe Brauer writes:
> to clarify: I could download the latest checkin via
> git clone http://git.savannah.gnu.org/r/auctex.git
>
> (I made a mistake in my last message) but
> git pull
> gives an error I reported.
Sorry, never had such an error. Did you somehow mess with the
On 09/03/2015 11:49 AM, Tassilo Horn
wrote:
Uwe Brauer writes:
> I strongly recommend to include the code in Auctex, maybe with a
> additional variable, something like this
It's far from perfect. For example, if you have some spurious ^ or _
> Stefan Monnier writes:
> I guess what Uwe wants is that `prettify-symbols-mode' in a (La)TeX
> buffer (with stock latex-mode or AUCTeX; doesn't really matter) could
> have the option to make the ^ and _ invisible, too.
> I already told him that this
Uwe Brauer writes:
> I strongly recommend to include the code in Auctex, maybe with a
> additional variable, something like this
It's far from perfect. For example, if you have some spurious ^ or _
somewhere in your text (not in some math) you won't see it at all. And