Re: [AUCTeX] font-latex-built-in-keyword-classes - minor errors and omissions

[Ralf Angeli]

* Rasmus Villemoes (2011-04-18) writes:

> Ralf Angeli <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> * Rasmus Villemoes (2011-04-07) writes:
>>
>>> ("sbox" "{")
>>>
>>> \sbox "officially" takes two arguments, but it may be on purpose that
>>> only the first is fontified as such.
>>
>> Yes, it could be on purpose.  Likely to avoid that a lot of text is
>> fontified and defeats other fontification.
>
> [and later]
>
>>> "function"
>>>
>>> ("parbox" "[[[{{")
>>> ("raisebox" "{[[{")
>>
>> Regarding the boxes I'm not really sure if those should be added because
>> as mentioned above, they could contain quite some text which should
>> better not all be painted in one color.
>
> Yes, that makes sense. But then, for consistency, one should probably
> add the "partial definitions" of the box commands, ie. everything but
> the contents of the box (which fortunately is always the last
> argument). So ("parbox" "[[[{") etc.

I've removed the definition for \sbox instead.  The problem with the
partial definitions is that the indication for a wrong number or
sequence of arguments will not work correctly, so it's probably better
not to fontify such macros at all.  At least as long as we don't use per
argument face assignments for the built-in keyword classes and thereby
cannot inhibit fontification of certain arguments.

-- 
Ralf