Re: [AUCTeX] New release on Friday?

[David Kastrup]

Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:

> 2015-11-04 11:13 GMT+01:00 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
>> Mosè Giordano <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> 2015-11-04 10:27 GMT+01:00 Uwe Siart <address@hidden>:
>>>> On 4 Nov 2015 at 10:07, Mosè Giordano wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> any objection against releasing a new version of AUCTeX by the end of
>>>>> this week, for example on Friday?  AUCTeX 11.88.9 has been released to
>>>>> ELPA two weeks ago and no one lamented havoc so far.
>>>>
>>>> No objection from me as a (frenetic) user :-) I saw lots of beneficial
>>>> enhancements in the changelog and I'll be very pleased about 11.89.
>>>>
>>>> PS: No problems here with 11.88.9 (except the default of
>>>> LaTeX-fill-break-at-separators, which has been changed, I think).
>>>
>>> Yes, now the default is nil.
>>
>> What was the rationale for that change?  preview-latex looks rather bad
>> when line breaks are put into math rather than outside.  And breaking
>> inline math across lines gratuitously does not help legibility either.
>>
>> So I'd be interested in the rationale: the whole
>> LaTeX-fill-break-at-separators machinery was created because there was a
>> need for it in order to have documents maintain well under filling.  So
>> it seems weird to disable it by default, making it mostly accessible to
>> experts (namely avid manual readers and customizers) rather than people
>> who prefer to have things "just work" out of the box.
>
> There was a thread in [AUCTeX] mailling list, "11.88.9 and
> fill-paragraph oddness".

Seriously?  There is a bug report for new Emacs versions' fill
functionality, and the reaction is to just disable the functionality
rather than address the problem?  Without any discussion?

LaTeX-fill-break-at-separators is a variable defined in ‘latex.el’.
Its value is ({ } \\\( \\\) \\\[ \\\])
Original value was nil

Documentation:
List of separators before or after which respectively a line
break will be inserted if they do not fit into one line.

You can customize this variable.

[back]

So the "if they do not fit into one line" condition obviously broke for
some reason, and rather than even try figuring out what happened, the
functionality just gets squashed?

-- 
David Kastrup