[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex
From: |
Ralf Angeli |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex |
Date: |
Sat, 27 Jun 2009 16:33:49 +0200 |
Please keep the mailing list copied!
* Andreas Breitbach (2009-06-27) writes:
> Am Samstag, den 27.06.2009, 15:42 +0200 schrieb Ralf Angeli:
>>
>> I still cannot reproduce this, not even with Emacs 22.2, so this will be
>> difficult to debug without having access to the installation. Anyway,
>> what's the result if you set `reftex-cite-prompt-optional-args' to nil?
> I hope to have the time to cross-check this whole stuff with another
> PC(running Ubuntu 8.10, as far as I remember). With the "nil"
> applied, it works as it should:
> \footcite{InternationalSecurity.1Summer.2000}.
Does it help if you apply the following patch to reftex-cite.el,
recompile and reinstall? Alternatively you can evaluate a patched
version of `reftex-do-citation' in a running Emacs session by copying
its definition into the *scratch* buffer and typing `C-M-x' with point
in it.
--- reftex-cite.el.~1.53.~ 2009-03-01 15:42:06.000000000 +0100
+++ reftex-cite.el 2009-06-27 16:27:14.000000000 +0200
@@ -702,8 +702,9 @@
(equal arg '(4))))
(let ((start 0) (nth 0) value)
(while (setq start (string-match "\\[\\]" string start))
- (setq value (read-string (format "Optional argument %d: "
- (setq nth (1+ nth)))))
+ (setq value (save-match-data
+ (read-string (format "Optional argument %d: "
+ (setq nth (1+ nth))))))
(setq string (replace-match (concat "[" value "]") t t string))
(setq start (1+ start)))))
;; Should we cleanup empty optional arguments?
--
Ralf
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, (continued)
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/25
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Ralf Angeli, 2009/06/25
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/26
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Ralf Angeli, 2009/06/26
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/26
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Ralf Angeli, 2009/06/26
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/26
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Ralf Angeli, 2009/06/27
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/27
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Ralf Angeli, 2009/06/27
- Message not available
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex,
Ralf Angeli <=
- Re: [Bug-AUCTeX] 11.85; Biblatex vs. RefTex, Andreas Breitbach, 2009/06/27