[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Support for two commands in graphicx.el

From: Tassilo Horn
Subject: Re: [AUCTeX-devel] Support for two commands in graphicx.el
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 08:27:04 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.130008 (Ma Gnus v0.8) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux)

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

>> On 2013-10-31 17:00, address@hidden wrote:
>>> I've seen \DeclareGraphicsExtensions in the real world, but I wonder if
>>> \DeclareGraphicsRule is such an important macro that it should be
>>> included in the completion.  I mean, whoever knows that the last
>>> argument (the shell command) must be preceeded by a single backward
>>> quote character doesn't need help, anyway.
>> OK. Argument accepted.
> Huh.  I wuld have thought that help is needed with the less frequent
> commands rather than the more frequent one.

Well, my argument is that if we add completion for macros that are
seldomly used, then completion doesn't serve discoverability anymore.  I
prefer to get only the 100 canditates that I'm likely to use rather than
500 ones, where 400 are probably not what I want (and I can't
distinguish between).

> I would have know the detail with the backtick, but I have no clue
> about the order of arguments of \DeclareGraphicsRule.  And it's not
> like supporting it causes any noticeable damage, does it?

Just one more macro, no.  But if we add the missing, less frequently
used macros, so that every style is complete, then my discoverability
argument makes sense, no?

Users are free to add the missing macros for the packages they use
extensively.  (We could also add some variable that would allow adding
"expert commands", where t would mean yes, and '("foo" "bar") would
mean only those of the foo and bar packages...)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]