Re: jinx

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>
> Cc: Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org>,  rms@gnu.org,  m.eliachevitch@posteo.de,
>   emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2023 14:32:36 +0200
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > > From: Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org>
> > > Cc: rms@gnu.org,  m.eliachevitch@posteo.de,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > > Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2023 09:42:40 +0200
> > >
> > > Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> > >
> > > > I'm not sure I understand item c), though: when and why would one want
> > > > to spell-check macros and environments?
> > >
> > > Sorry, I meant to say arguments/bodies of macros/environments, not the
> > > name of macros and environments.
> >
> > This is again not TeX-specific.  Similar issues exist in Texinfo and
> > in other markup languages.  The annoyance is usually minor: it's
> > enough to tell the speller to "accept" a word just once, since the
> > number of markup codes is usually very small.  But it would be nicer,
> > of course, if Emacs could automatically skip markup in each major
> > mode.
> 
> Wasn't that the purpose of `flyspell-prog-mode'?

Markup languages are usually not descendants of prog-modes.

Or maybe I misunderstand what you are saying.