> Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2022 at 1:43 AM > From: "Stefan Monnier" <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> > To: "Tassilo Horn" <t...@gnu.org> > Cc: "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org>, auctex-devel@gnu.org > Subject: Re: AUCTeX and "builtin latex mode" integration > > Tassilo Horn [2022-09-20 08:38:27] wrote: > > Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> writes: > >> What I'm really asking here is if there's a willingness to introduce > >> the inevitable bit of breakage in exchange for a supposed longer term > >> benefit, and/or if someone can think of a better way to move towards a > >> better long-term arrangement than the status quo. > > I wonder why/if it's important that the AUCTeX modes identify as the > > builtin modes, i.e., what would be the issue with having (La)TeX-mode > > major-modes which have no relationship to (la)tex-mode at all plus a > > setup command users would call in their init file in order to modify > > `auto-mode-alist' so that the AUCTeX modes are added? > > It might cause problems for people with `-*- latex -*-` in their files. > But other than that, it's also an option, indeed. > > Personally, I like the idea that `auto-mode-alist` (and mode cookies) > should describe the type of a file, rather than the specific mode to use > for it, but that's just me (and Emacs doesn't make that convenient > since it doesn't offer the needed indirection).
I am inclined to the idea, with a simpler mechanism to impose specific modes if one wants to go beyond the built-in one.
