> In which situation you need to stick to the old tex-based completion? I
> used my aux-based completion since one or two months and I never missed
> the tex-based completion.
It's too restrictive for me to need to have the PDF visible at every
time I edit. It's nice sometimes to see a numbered equation, realize you
want a reference to it, and quickly add a reference without figuring out
its label. However, normally when I'm referring to equations in-line
with text, I'm writing that text soon after I generated the equation
label (and in close proximity). Moreover, I use a label that has some
useful meaning. For example, a reference to Newton's Second Law could be
"eq:n2l", and I wouldn't have to open up a PDF to find it.
So I can see some cases where the aux-based completion would be
convenient, but I think most people would need the tex-based completion
most of the time.
>> I'm a little confused (I haven't looked at the script) about how the
>> completer picks the \*ref you want. Some people are going to use the
>> \*refs provided by the cleveref package. Others (like me) are going to
>> use \autoref nearly everywhere but other variants (\Autoref) in some
>> places and \ref in some other cases (after "and", for example), and I
>> would never ever use \eqref. How could I configure?
> Currently, this can't be customized, but it is surely possible.
So long as...
\ref{thm.4.5<F9>
\autoref{thm.4.5<F9>
\ScoobyDooRef{thm.4.5<F9>
all leave their macros in tact, then it wouldn't be a problem. People
who don't like your choices can type their own choices and just use F9
to fill in the labels.
>> For one, how is the average user going to know for sure
>> exactly which AUX name to use (thm.4.5 vs theorem.4.5)?
> You have to use the name of the latex counter.
A lot of people (especially when journals setup theorem-like
environments for you) won't know the counter name. I suppose they could
assume they know the first letter of the counter and use F9 to figure
out the rest<?>.
> Because I can type (2.2) faster than equation.2.2.
But, as you say, the counter.number still works.
>> Furthermore, I think I would much rather type...
>>
>> \autoref{theorem.4.5<F9>}
>>
>> and have that replaced with
>>
>> \autoref{thm:a_nice_theorem}
> This does work.
And leaves the macro (whatever it is called) in tact? Does the macro
have to end in "ref" or will the completion be activated for any curly
brace?
--Ted
--
Ted Pavlic <t...@tedpavlic.com>
Please visit my 2010 d'Feet ALS walk page:
http://web.alsa.org/goto/tpavlic
My family appreciates your support in the fight to defeat ALS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software Download: Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Vim-latex-devel mailing list
Vim-latex-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vim-latex-devel
