Re: Updating xparse.el

[Florent Rougon]

Hi Arash,

Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> wrote:

> thanks for your comment.  I've heard that most people hacking on .dtx
> files simply turn off fontification as it might be too distracting.

Heh, that's a bit extreme. For .dtx files, I have in my config:

;; Set up less distracting colors for docTeX mode
(eval-after-load "tex-fold"
  '(progn
     ;; Show enough text in tooltips for folded contents
     (setq TeX-fold-help-echo-max-length 1000
           TeX-fold-type-list '(comment)
           TeX-fold-ellipsis "…")
     ;; My normal background color
     (set-face-background 'TeX-fold-folded-face "#ededd1")
     (set-face-background 'TeX-fold-unfolded-face "#ededd1")
     (set-face-background 'font-latex-doctex-documentation-face "#ededd1")
     ;; Same color as for comments
     (set-face-foreground 'TeX-fold-folded-face "Firebrick")
     ))

I find the result quite usable:

  https://imgur.com/a/v5R1TNw

> I don't think it is a big deal to provide a custom variable, say,
> `font-latex-fontify-code-arguments' and then apply a conditional to the
> style files in the fontification section.
>
> What do others think?  Any idea for a better variable name?

That would be a great improvement, IMHO. Of course, by “not fontifying
code arguments,” what I really mean is “fontify them as if they were not
macro arguments.” IOW, I'm happy with little things being fontified
inside the “replacement text” argument of a command. What I don't like
is when the whole code is forcibly colored in blue, which kills the
finer fontification one would have if the same code were outside a macro
argument. Example of what I like (my setup):

  https://imgur.com/a/7ADVb5e

As you can see, the #1 and #2 inside the code arguments are not in the
same face as the rest of said arguments, and that's quite fine with me.

Thanks for your great work; AUCTeX is truly a very well maintained
project!

Regards

-- 
Florent