Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Jonathan Kew wrote: > I'll try to get an experimental patch ready shortly. Or, of course, > someone else is welcome to try. I don't think it's very hard, but it is > more than just a single number. I have never attempted to modify *TeX since it ceased to be compiled as Pascal (a language which

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Mukunda Pasedach
I eventually managed to build xetex (on Ubuntu 14.04, with a TeX Live 2015 installation kept up to date) by cloning the xetex sources from sourceforge, then modified, as an experiment, xetex.web, replacing 63 by 1023 in the places that seemed relevant, only guessing which ones they were, noticed th

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Reinhard Kotucha wrote: > Phil assumed that scanning the log file is time consuming and thus > suggested configurable exit values. But as Zdeněk already pointed > out, scanning the log file is not time consuming at all. Whether or not scanning the log file is time-consuming is not really my po

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Jonathan Kew
On 18/3/16 08:43, Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: I eventually managed to build xetex (on Ubuntu 14.04, with a TeX Live 2015 installation kept up to date) by cloning the xetex sources from sourceforge, then modified, as an experiment, xetex.web, replacing 63 by 1023 in the places that seemed releva

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Reinhard Kotucha
On 2016-03-17 at 00:41:45 -0500, msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Stefan Löffler wrote: > > More importantly, though, several scripts could be run (say, one > > that looks only for errors and only that only looks for warnings) > > which could give contradicting results (e

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Reinhard Kotucha wrote: > It's true that only TeX /knows/ whether bad boxes occurred during a > TeX run. But TeX passes this knowledge to the log file, hence > nothing is lost and the log file even provides more information > (line numbers). But, as previously pointed out, a TeX program can

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Melroch
Den 19 mar 2016 11:00 skrev "Philip Taylor" : > > > > Reinhard Kotucha wrote: > > > It's true that only TeX /knows/ whether bad boxes occurred during a > > TeX run. But TeX passes this knowledge to the log file, hence > > nothing is lost and the log file even provides more information > > (line nu

[XeTeX] Request for help compiling XeTeX from git

2016-03-19 Thread Mojca Miklavec
Hi, I would like to ask for some help with building XeTeX from git. After fetching the sources (0d17a3eb4) I end up with the following autofoo hell: https://sourceforge.net/p/xetex/bugs/126/ (see attachment) If you prefer to check it in the browser, here's the same file: http://pastebin.

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Akira Kakuto
Dear Philip, As Stefan says: SL> However, it can be worked around relatively easily by manually SL> opening the console (which should then remain open until closed manually). I think it is best to open the console window manually by CTRL+\. Then the console window is not closed, and you can jum

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Mark Yagnatinsky
I'd like to suggest a potentially dumb idea. So far, I've seen only one objection to keeping the console open based on the whatever the after-typesetting scripts do. Namely, that they might disagree with each other, and then what is poor TeXworks to do? But I say it's obvious what it should do i

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Zdeněk Wagner wrote: > Even now it is possible to swich to \scrollmode or \nonstopmode and > issue \errmsg although no error appeared. As another test I inserted the > following: > > \setbox254=\hbox to .1pt{A} > > It reports an overfull hbox although the box is never used. Thus if the > code

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Jonathan Kew
Peter, I have just pushed a new experimental branch named "max-hyph-len" to the xetex repository. The changes here implement a new integer parameter \XeTeXhyphenatablelength which defaults to 63 (to maintain existing behavior), but can be increased to allow longer words to be hyphenated. (

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Mukunda Pasedach
Any news on this? If it's just one constant whose value I would have to increase in my private copy of the code, before recompling, for testing purposes, which one would that be? Peter On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 12:37 AM, Zdenek Wagner wrote: > 2016-03-16 0:06 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Kew : >> >> On 15/3

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Dear Akira-san -- > As Stefan says: > > SL> However, it can be worked around relatively easily by manually > SL> opening the console (which should then remain open until closed > manually). > > I think it is best to open the console window manually > by CTRL+\. Then the console window is not clo

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Mukunda Pasedach
I finally managed to build it in such a way that it identifies itself with the right version number, I had to do a new clone of the sources for that, didn't find out how to clean them up. Now how do I set the parameter, as \XeTeXhyphenatablelength=1023 somewhere in my preamble or as a command line

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: > I finally managed to build it in such a way that it identifies itself > with the right version number, I had to do a new clone of the sources > for that, didn't find out how to clean them up. Now how do I set the > parameter, as \XeTeXhyphenatablelength=1023 somew

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Mukunda Pasedach
That would be fmtutil --all? Yes I ran that. Maybe something wrong with my test file? -- \documentclass[12pt]{article} \usepackage{fontspec} \usepackage{polyglossia} \setdefaultlanguage{sanskrit} \newfontfamily{\sanskritfont}{Latin Modern Roman} \XeTeXhyphenatablelength=1023 \begin{docume

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: > That would be fmtutil --all? Yes I ran that. Maybe something wrong > with my test file? Ah, there I can't help, I am afraid; it is written in LaTeX, a language with which I have near-zero familiarity. Is it possible for you to test in a plain e-TeX environment,

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Jonathan Kew
On 19/3/16 20:30, Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: That would be fmtutil --all? Yes I ran that. Maybe something wrong with my test file? Yes, in a sense... you're running into another quirk of TeX: it doesn't attempt to hyphenate the first word of a paragraph. And in your file, every word is the

Re: [XeTeX] Request for help compiling XeTeX from git

2016-03-19 Thread Arthur Reutenauer
Hi Mojca, > Is there any better command than ./build.sh shortcut that I should be > using? Can I somehow run separate steps for configure, make, test? XeTeX’s build.sh only sets a number of variables and runs configure and make, so if you’re scripting the process, it does indeed make se

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Jonathan Kew
On 17/3/16 05:16, Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: Any news on this? If it's just one constant whose value I would have to increase in my private copy of the code, before recompling, for testing purposes, which one would that be? Unfortunately, it's not just a single constant; there are a number o

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Roland Kuhn
Please, this is clearly not leading anywhere, and it has long since diverged from the topics this list has been created for. > 18 mar 2016 kl. 19:20 skrev Philip Taylor : > > Are you /determined/ not to let this matter be brought to a close, > Arthur, in just the same way that you were clearly d

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Mukunda Pasedach
This seems to work, at least for my test file. I tried on one of my much more complex real files, including reledmac etc., and there your quick hack for first word of paragraph didn't work yet, but if I manually add the \hskip 0pt \relax at the beginning of a paragraph then it works there, too. For

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Zdenek Wagner
Remember that LaTeX macros may redefine \everypar. For instance all sectioning command (\section, \subsection etc.) are implemented via \@startsection which ends with \@afterheading which uses \everypar to change some penalties and indentation of the first paragraph. I am not sure whether it is res

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Jonathan Kew
On 19/3/16 21:57, Peter Mukunda Pasedach wrote: This seems to work, at least for my test file. I tried on one of my much more complex real files, including reledmac etc., and there your quick hack for first word of paragraph didn't work yet, That doesn't surprise me; I'm sure LaTeX will be maki

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Arthur Reutenauer
On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 12:07:26PM +, Philip Taylor wrote: > You will, I am sure, be > aware that I had not pursued the topic for some time That's simply not true. Arthur -- Subscripti

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Peter Wilson
Here, here (or is it "Hear, hear"?) Peter W. On 18/03/16 19:19, Roland Kuhn wrote: Please, this is clearly not leading anywhere, and it has long since diverged from the topics this list has been created for. 18 mar 2016 kl. 19:20 skrev Philip Taylor : Are you /determined/ not to let this ma

Re: [XeTeX] Hyphenation of strings of more than 63 characters

2016-03-19 Thread Akira Kakuto
I have just pushed a new experimental branch named "max-hyph-len" to the xetex repository. The changes here implement a new integer parameter \XeTeXhyphenatablelength Users of windows can test xetex-0.6 by obtaining a 32bit binary: http://members2.jcom.home.ne.jp/wt1357ak/xetex-6-w3

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Zdenek Wagner
2016-03-18 10:55 GMT+01:00 Philip Taylor : > > > Arthur Reutenauer wrote: > > > Of course they can /know/: by inspecting the log file. It contains > > the exact transcript of the TeX run, and thus reflects all of TeX's > > knowledge about what happened when compiling the file; as far as > > overf

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread mskala
On Wed, 16 Mar 2016, Stefan Löffler wrote: > More importantly, though, several scripts could be run (say, one that > looks only for errors and only that only looks for warnings) which could > give contradicting results (e.g., no errors => close, warnings => don't I think you're describing some kin

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread Philip Taylor
Are you /determined/ not to let this matter be brought to a close, Arthur, in just the same way that you were clearly determined not to allow the debate on Greek & Latin hyphenation be brought to a close on another list ? My sole contribution to this thread post 13th inst. was one response in repl

Re: [XeTeX] [texworks] Overfull boxes return status of 0 in XeTeX

2016-03-19 Thread mskala
On Fri, 18 Mar 2016, Reinhard Kotucha wrote: > > hboxes, as directly as possible. A script that replaces TeX can > Matthew, honestly, I don't think that people didn't understand your > suggestion. There are just a few problems and there is no real > benefit, IMO. > > You suggested to put the wr