Re: fail on regression test

[Arash Esbati]

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