[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: the justifying of indented text

From: Seb
Subject: Re: the justifying of indented text
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2019 21:57:30 +0100 (CET)
User-agent: Alpine 2.21 (DEB 202 2017-01-01)

Hi Benno,

* if autoindent is OFF (which in my mind means "I'm writing text"):

    Yes, an indented line can only ever be the start of a paragraph     because that's pretty much the definition of a paragraph in a text.

Okay.  But what about bullet lists?

Bullet lists are GREAT. They work only when auto-indent is ON. So I switch it on when I write one.

I did write that "I *usually* don't use autoindent [...] if I'm writing a text". Two exceptions came to my mind but I thought I'd make my point more clearly if I omitted them at first. Bullet lists are one. The other one is long quotations, which I put in paragraphs that have a Tab offset at each line (and a second <Tab> on the first line of each paragraph). For these, too, I need auto-indent.

* If autoindent in ON:

    Two lines sharing the same amount of space at the beginning of either
    line belong to the same paragraph.

But...  If I understood well, autoindent being ON means you are writing
code, and in the code itself there are no paragraphs.

If I'm writing code, I use --auto-indent to, well, auto-indent the code. I seldom use justification in this case, but there is one use case: if I don't switch off the hard wrapping of long lines, eventually I'll type one line that will reach the 80th column of my terminal and the text will spill to the next line; justification brings the two lines back together nicely after Esc-L and Alt-Enter to temporarily maximize the width of my terminal.

I also use auto-indent for bullet lists and long quotations. In bullet lists, I can't remember a time when I may have wanted to separate two paragraphs within one bullet point. In long quotations, it could be discussed but the fix is easy (blank line). Whereas in code such as
I cannot leave a blank line otherwise the \noindent has no effect.

    %    Jusqu'en 2014, le moteur de LaTeX incluait un bug léger dans
    % \addpenalty, du fichier ltspace.dtx (dans une TeXLive). Il était
    % corrigé via le fichier fixltx2e.dtx, qui était appelé en \usepackage.
    %    À partir de 2015, TeXLive a fusionné ces fichiers. Or le changement
    % dans la définition de \addpenalty a fait que des corrigés compilaient
    % différemment selon qu'ils étaient compilés sur une TeXLive 2014 (qui
    % était incluse dans la Debian stable début 2017) ou sur une TeXLive
    % 2015+ (cas d'Ubuntu et de la nouvelle Debian stable arrivée en milieu
    % de session).
    %    La correction de ce bug n'améliore pas les Annales en pratique. Il
    % est plus important que la compilation soit la même partout. C'est
    % pourquoi on met ci-dessous l'ancienne définition de \addpenalty.

    The "%" symbols need to stay vertically aligned (let's say that "%" is
    in quotestr). Whatever happens after "%" does not count. Autoindent or

Here you say that for comments autoindent does not matter, but in the next paragraph you say that the justifying behavior for comments should differ depending on whether autoindent is OFF or ON. What am I overlooking?

Sorry, that was confusing. In the paragraph above I was referring to the % symbols only. No matter how the text to the right is justified by ^J, the "%" have to stay vertically aligned--and I know this is Nano's current behavior. (No problem then.)

    In the comment's text, the separation into three paragraphs conveys
    meaning and should be preserved if the user wishes so: if autoindent is
    OFF, keep the paragraphs; if it is ON, fuse them together.

Fuse together?  But nano has never done this.

Well, not in the case above but if I write:
        %<Tab>Some text
then a ^J will fuse the two lines into one, same point as before.

nano should not justify things differently depending on the setting of autoindent.


In the above explanations you say that any indentation (when autoindent is OFF) should mean: start-of-new-paragraph. But I think that is unnecessarily limiting: it would prevent justifying bullet items.

It wouldn't because bulleted lists work only when auto-indent is ON.

This is an example where Nano behaves differently depending on whether auto-indent is on or off :-)

So, to see whether seeing only a TAB as the indicator of a new paragraph is enough to bring back your desired justifying behavior, please try the attached patch. It should apply with only offset and no fuzz to 4.6.

It's CHRISTMAS!! Thanks alot for the present Father Benno!!

Kind regards,

reply via email to

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