[AUCTeX] Re: Comment filling : I would like to make a contribution

[Vincent Belaïche]

Ralf Angeli a écrit :
> * Vincent Belaïche (2008-08-10) writes:
>
>   
> > Then there are two drawbacks for that
> > 1) the user has to care not to make a M-q when the point is in the 
> > pre-preprocessor code
> >     
>
> That's what I've already written above.  Of course this would not be a
> problem if there were dedicated filling code which would be able to deal
> with the syntax of the preprocessor code.  This would be a superior
> solution to simply making the preprocessor code immutable to the filling
> code. 
Just for clarification : the preprocesor (EUPP) code is not immutable. 
The preprocessor (EUPP) that I have developped comprises an edit command 
`eupp-edit'. The preprocessor code is comprised into bloc (EUPP blocs), 
when the pointer in on a bloc, and you call eupp-edit, then all the 
processor code of this bloc is copied to another buffer (*Eupp edit* 
buffer) which is in Emacs-lisp mode. There you can modify and fill the 
code at you guise, and then, when you are over with it, you call `C-c 
C-c' which is, within *Eupp edit* buffer bound to function 
eupp-edit-finish. The eupp-edit-finish functions then copies back the 
modified, and possibly filled, eupp code, back the orginal (e.g. LaTeX) 
buffer into the Eupp bloc (using special comments)

With this approach all Elisp specific editing commands, including 
filling, are normal used without any need for new commands.


>  The latter way would just be a quick way of providing something
> like the verbatim environment in LaTeX.  
Ok, what you mean is that you prefer some marks delimiting a whole 
section of Eupp code, rather than line-by-line delimitation.

Actually, I had not in mind that the verbatim environment is not 
fillable when it is within comments.
Since in Eupp marks that delimit the Eupp bloc are configurable, I can 
easilly configure them for the whole Eupp block comment to start with a 
\begin{verbatim}
and end with an \end{verbatim} without changing the current Eupp code 
(only some variable default value) and without changing AUCTeX.

However, I had in mind that it would be better if this kind of 
delimitation was configurable, in that case I could reuse the same marks 
that I have (for your clarification: there are marks at the beginning 
and end of each line, but also the beginning of the first line of a 
block, and the end of the last line in a block have their own marks).

> I'd use something like that for
> content which does not follow a certain syntax.  In other cases
> a separate major mode would usually be better.  I've hinted at that
> before as well.
>
>   
> > 2) the pre-processor code will split paragraphs into pieces, which I 
> > think is awkward.
> >     
>
> I don't understand this statement.
>
>   
Forget about it.

I just meant that you would need to make that each line of the Eupp code 
be interpreted as a single paragraph in order that the filling does not 
shift Eupp code line begin/end marks from one line to another, and that 
this would make many small paragraphs, which is a bit awkward.
> > > I can still see some use for the definition of sections which should be
> > > spared from filling (especially if a larger region is to be filled), but
> > > perhaps there should better be a general mechanism in Emacs which could
> > > be used or adopted by AUCTeX once it is there.
> > >       
> [...]
>   
> > What you suggest would need that AUCTeX filling mechanism should be a 
> > layer on top of some general filling kernel provided by Emacs, whereas 
> > it seems to be currently a complete overload of Emacs filling procedure 
> > (w/o reuse).
> >     
>
> It would be good if we could use more of the functionality from Emacs
> proper, but filling in AUCTeX has to jump through quite some hoops to be
> able to fill docTeX documentation parts and cater for special break
> points in LaTeX code.  Since the standard Emacs filling code did not
> provide this, it was implemented in AUCTeX.
>
> But this is just an implementation detail.  What I was talking about
> earlier is that _conceptually_ the possibility to make sections
> immutable to filling should not be a trait of AUCTeX, but of Emacs,
> i.e. _if_ there really is a need for this it should be provided as a
> general functionality.  Personally I think it would be better to improve
> Emacs' provisions for multi major mode files types.
>
>   
I fully agree with this point. Actually Eupp is not specific to LaTeX, 
but it can be used with any Language that allows line-wise comments with 
free comment content
> > *Please confirm your intention* :
> > do you object to my contribution ?
> > If yes, you seem however to see some need for unfillable sections, could 
> > you please tell me how I could make this function available in an 
> > acceptable manner, as I do need for it, and I am sure that other people 
> > may need for it too.
> >     
>
> I'd post the idea on the Emacs development list for discussion.
>
>   
Ok, I will follow this. Anyhow, I am not in a hurry as I have this local 
version of latex.el which I contribution to fulfill my need for the time 
being.

Does this idea also mean that the AUCTeX specific filling for docstring 
will also need to rely on an Emacs generic filling kernel ?

BR,
  Vincent.