bug#70370: [PATCH] Add section folding commands

2024-04-13 Thread Paul Nelson
Hello, This patch adds section folding commands, so as to bring the interface for folding more in line with that for previewing. Thanks, best, Paul 0001-Add-section-folding-commands.patch Description: Binary data ___ bug-auctex mailing list bug-aucte

bug#70369: [PATCH] Fix folding glitch with tmm disabled

2024-04-13 Thread Paul Nelson
Hello, Steps to reproduce: - Disable transient-mark-mode. - Create test.tex containing "\emph{foo} \emph{bar}". - Move point inside "foo" and set the mark (C-SPC). Note that this does not "activate the region". - TeX-fold-buffer (C-c C-o C-b). - Move the point into "bar". What should happen is t

bug#70331: [PATCH] Call custom folding functions with consistent point

2024-04-13 Thread Paul Nelson
Hi Arash, > How do you generate the changelog above? When I paste the entry in my > ChangeLog inside my local repo and re-fill, it looks like this: > > * tex-fold.el (TeX-fold-hide-item): Call folding spec with point > at beginning of item. > * doc/auctex.texi (Folding): Mention the new con

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread Arash Esbati
gusbrs writes: > (Besides, sinners know they are sinners ;-). ;-) > Thank you! Regarding the remaining part, again, my advice to you is > not to invest too much time in this. So, feel free to "won't fix" and > close. I will do so. We can re-open once there is a real for this, we can then see

bug#70331: [PATCH] Call custom folding functions with consistent point

2024-04-13 Thread Arash Esbati
Hi Paul, Paul Nelson writes: > From 594ff7ad7454d42dbab37e213714f9827e1061b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Paul Nelson > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 07:33:21 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] Call custom folding functions with consistent point Thanks for patch, I installed it (5f40b686b4). I have one qu

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread gusbrs
Hi Arash, On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 at 18:03, Arash Esbati wrote: > I think the editor has to make some assumption; this is one of them. I personally classify that as misbehavior. But I can certainly understand you prefer not to change things at a critical place (and why). (Besides, sinners know they

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread Arash Esbati
Hi Gustavo, gusbrs writes: > All in all, with perhaps the adjustment of the previous comment, this > looks good to me. It is close to as good as is possible within this > approach and certainly counts as good enough in my view. Thanks for testing and your feedback. > But I won't leave you empt

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread gusbrs
Hi Arash, On Sat, 13 Apr 2024 at 13:09, Arash Esbati wrote: > Thanks, nice. But I think the necessity you mention is also the weak > point of this approach: You can't just load a .tex file, run the caller > `reftex-create-bibtex-file' and close the file; you have to compile the > file. So I do

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread Arash Esbati
Hi Gustavo, gusbrs writes: > On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 12:46, Arash Esbati wrote: > > Just "someone" playing a little with this: > > (defun reftex-all-used-citation-keys-alt () > (let* (keys) > (if (reftex-using-biblatex-p) > (let* ((master (reftex-TeX-master-file)) >

bug#38249: 12.2.0; reftex-create-bibtex-file and biblatex

2024-04-13 Thread gusbrs
Hi Arash, On Thu, 11 Apr 2024 at 12:46, Arash Esbati wrote: > I think AUCTeX/RefTeX are here, if we can improve them, we should do it. > And if someone wants to replace it with something better, we can do it > as well. It is always a matter of "I need that", and best case is one > implements th