[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: fail on regression test
From: |
Arash Esbati |
Subject: |
Re: fail on regression test |
Date: |
Mon, 10 Jan 2022 12:55:38 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 |
Hi Keita,
Ikumi Keita <ikumi@ikumi.que.jp> writes:
>>>>>> Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> writes:
>
> Hm, my preference is to support both versions. From my experience, it's
> not rare that people use TeX Live installation a few years old. For most
> users, the aim to have TeX distribution is to write documents,
> especially with math formulae, so they generally don't consider it much
> important to keep up with the latest TeX Live in my opinion.
It seems we have the first user complaining :-)
https://tex.stackexchange.com/q/629509/76063
>> Does the above make sense?
>
> Yes, of course. :-) I don't object strongly against your plan.
Sounds good :-) I see that currently we don't parse the second optional
date argument after the package name. This is what latex.el does:
(defvar LaTeX-auto-minimal-regexp-list
'(("\\\\document\\(style\\|class\\)\
\\(\\[\\(\\([^#\\%]\\|%[^\n\r]*[\n\r]\\)*\\)\\]\\)?\
{\\([^#\\.\n\r]+?\\)}"
(3 5 1) LaTeX-auto-style)
("\\\\use\\(package\\)\\(\\[\\([^]]*\\)\\]\\)?\
{\\(\\([^#}\\.%]\\|%[^\n\r]*[\n\r]\\)+?\\)}"
(3 4 1) LaTeX-auto-style))
"Minimal list of regular expressions matching LaTeX macro definitions.")
Hence we have to patch some inner parts. Am I missing something?
Best, Arash
- fail on regression test, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/06
- Re: fail on regression test, Arash Esbati, 2022/01/06
- Re: fail on regression test, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/06
- Re: fail on regression test,
Arash Esbati <=
- Re: fail on regression test, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/10
- Re: fail on regression test, Arash Esbati, 2022/01/10
- siunitx support, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/10
- Re: siunitx support, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/10
- Re: siunitx support, Arash Esbati, 2022/01/11
- Re: siunitx support, Ikumi Keita, 2022/01/11
- Re: siunitx support, Arash Esbati, 2022/01/11