Hi Keita,
Ikumi Keita <[email protected]> writes:
>> How about this:
First of all, my last patch wasn't correct, please try this one if you
want to test:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
diff --git a/font-latex.el b/font-latex.el
index b78cf58a..0d32eab1 100644
--- a/font-latex.el
+++ b/font-latex.el
@@ -1095,7 +1095,10 @@ have changed."
;; Some macros take an optional argument. This is
;; the same line as above for environments.
"\\(?:\\[[^][]*\\(?:\\[[^][]*\\][^][]*\\)*\\]\\)?"
- "\\({\\).*?[^\\]\\(?:\\\\\\\\\\)*\\(}\\)")
+ "\\({\\)"
+ "\\(?:[^}{]*\\(?:{[^}{]*}[^}{]*\\)*\\)"
+ "[^\\]\\(?:\\\\\\\\\\)*"
+ "\\(}\\)")
(1 "|") (2 "|")))))
(when font-latex-syntactic-keywords-extra
(nconc font-latex-syntactic-keywords font-latex-syntactic-keywords-extra))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
> Hmm. That would fail if some verbatim macro has an intentional unpaired
> "{" in its argument like \foobar{aaa"{"bbb} .
> But maybe it's a corner case that we don't have to worry about. I'm not
> sure.
This is indeed a corner case: Packages like fvextra.sty which allow
things like \Verb{content} explicitly require balanced braces;
\Verb{co{ntent} raises an error during compilation whereas
\Verb|co{ntent| works. Another issue with my suggestion above is this:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fvextra}
\begin{document}
\Verb{w{o}r{k}s}
\Verb{b{r}eak{s}}
\end{document}
due to "[^\\]\\(?:\\\\\\\\\\)*" in the regexp.
Best, Arash
