[AUCTeX-devel] TeX output dimensions in ConTeXt

[Carlos]

I'm having a problem with the frame output dimensions of the window.
Or the output buffer of a file. 

This is something undesirable, not from an aesthetic point of view, but
from  following up with errors, warnings, and the whole family, which
results throughout the compilation of a document.

It is a known fact, that TeX-source-correlate-mode is
not to have a true value for mtxrun to perform inverse
searches. It might be the case that it's a necessity for its LaTeX
counterpart. It is also a known fact, that at least in one system,
dbus-forward had problems.

But the problem here are dimensions with the output window. Why? Because
if I'm looking at an error, it's inconvenient to have to enter a greater
than less than symbols,  or whatever you want to call them, to go to the
top level of a file, or to the bottom level of said file.

I want to go right to where the error is, and not wander around, because
then, it no longer is convenient, and my fingers get tired. 

I'd  pretty much like to have my dear emacs, to display the error, right
at level reach. Yes. like this : >> undefined control sequence, bla bla
bla.

And see it right away, instead of having to enter < or > to go top or
bottom of buffers.

Other than that, I can't complaint.

TeX-correlate-mode is not necessary, although I have set it true in the
initialization file.

Okular is working flawlessly. C-c C-v is behaving accordingly.

I just had to spread out some lines in context.el and added the option
--synctex to context's TeX-command-list. Texec is working great
too. Although in all honesty, except for documents that might have been
compiled with that wrapper, is not known whether it is a good idea, to
have it laying around. Why? I'll tell you why, because it is identified
as ConTeXt but unfortunately points out to texexec. And this means that
most new documents will not utilize the great features of lua as it is
being implemented now.

Anyhow, the above was just a rant I guess.

(defun TeX-ConTeXt-sentinel (process name)
  "Cleanup TeX output buffer after running ConTeXt."
  (cond ((TeX-TeX-sentinel-check process name))
        ((save-excursion
           ;; in a full ConTeXt run there will multiple texutil
           ;; outputs. Just looking for "another run needed" would
           ;; find the first occurence
           (goto-char (point-max))
                      (re-search-backward "TeXUtil" nil t)
                      (re-search-forward "another run needed" nil t)
                      (message "%s" (concat "ConTeXt successfully formatted"
                                            (TeX-current-pages)
                               (message (concat "You should run ConTeXt again"
                                                "to get references right."
                                                (message "successfully 
finished")))
                                                (TeX-current-pages)
                                                (setq TeX-command-Show)))))))


in context.el

and the following

    ("ConTeXt Full" "context --synctex %t"
     TeX-run-TeX t
     (context-mode) :help "Run ConTeXt until completion")

in tex.el

works as expected, until say for example:


\starttext

a test to test it out bla bla bla

\iethutehe
\input zapf

\stoptext


Just above the file zapf, there is the infamous undefined control
sequence. So, when one registers C-c C-l to display the errors, by which
the document would not compile, the window, only shows around line 9,
which is the file zapf, but the visible area where the error is located,
is not shown.

So let's go to the output of the file with C-x o
And then, it only selects where the error is, that is, the >> \ietuhet
(whatever), only after registering less than and greater than symbols,
so it redraws the screen, although, that redraw terminology, better not
be used in this context, no pun intended, for it refers to another macro
not related with this issue.

Anyhow. As always, any help is greatly appreciated.

Mosè. How've you been? I was going to send you this message as email,
because the setup of gnus in this machine was not setup
correctly. And then I remember that Tassilo loves emails with html in
it, so I was quite unsure whether that would be the best route. hehehe.

Thanks.

Carlos