Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Hello,
>
> Rasmus writes:
>
>> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>>>
>>> I suggest to avoid calling repeatedly
>>> `org-export-get-footnote-definition'. Also, if the footnote reference is
>>> anonymous, there is no point in calling `org-element-map'. The following
>>> is more ef
Hello,
Rasmus writes:
> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>>
>> I suggest to avoid calling repeatedly
>> `org-export-get-footnote-definition'. Also, if the footnote reference is
>> anonymous, there is no point in calling `org-element-map'. The following
>> is more efficient:
>>
>> (format "\\footnote{%
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> You don't seem to use the latter. Does it still make sense to provide
> it?
No.
> I suggest to avoid calling repeatedly
> `org-export-get-footnote-definition'. Also, if the footnote reference is
> anonymous, there is no point in calling `org-element-map'. The following
Rasmus writes:
> (:latex-default-table-mode nil nil org-latex-default-table-mode)
> (:latex-diary-timestamp-format nil nil org-latex-diary-timestamp-format)
> (:latex-footnote-separator nil nil org-latex-footnote-separator)
> +(:latex-footnote-defined-format nil nil
> org-late
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> You sent the wrong patch.
Ups...!
--
Vote for proprietary math!
>From 880eb2047f7895a4d767ce59b9fe13465b5a16a7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Rasmus
Date: Sun, 22 May 2016 20:33:06 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] ox-latex: More robust repeated footnote references
* lisp/ox-l
Hello,
Rasmus writes:
> The GOAL is to make "pretty" latex and not clutter every footnote with
> labels.
I understand that. I actually misread the code.
> I think the logic is better now, but it uses the plain
> org-export-map rather than org-export--footnote-reference-map.
The difference b
Hi,
Thanks for comments.
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>> Though perhaps there’s a more efficient way to get the first
>> footnote-reference to a given definition than trawling through with
>> org-export--footnote-reference-map.
>
> Couldn't you refer to the definition instead of the first reference
