Re: AUCTeX and "builtin latex mode" integration

[Uwe Brauer]

>>> "SM" == Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:


[Snip]...

>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-i" #'tex-bibtex-file)
>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-o" #'latex-insert-block)
>> 
>> ;; Redundant keybindings, for consistency with SGML mode.
>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-t" #'latex-insert-block)
>> [...]
>> (define-key map "\C-c/" #'latex-close-block)
>> 
>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-e" #'latex-close-block)
>> [...]
>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-m" #'tex-feed-input)
>> [...]
>> (defvar latex-mode-map
>> (let ((map (make-sparse-keymap)))
>> [...]
>> (define-key map "\C-c\C-s" #'latex-split-block)
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> All these key sequences have different binding in AUCTeX (+RefTeX).
>> Thus I don't see a clean way to meet the assumption "if we can arrange
>> for latex-mode and auctex-mode not to collide in their keymaps".

> [ Side note: RefTeX is also used with plan `latex-mode`.  ]

> AFAIK the only clean way is to actually change those bindings.
> Yes, users will complain, and it may even break some 3rd party code, so
> it'll be somewhat painful.

Given that, and I am using for example cdlatex I must ask:

is this drastic change really needed? I have not seen lately
complains about having AucTeX and LaTeX-mode.[1]

regards

Uwe Brauer 

Footnotes:
[1]  frankly I can see much use of this old LaTeX-mode anyway, but that
     is a different topic

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature