[Bug-AUCTeX] Re: preview oddity when "merging" inline formulas...

[Evil Boris]

Sorry for delayed response.  I have been traveling/otherwise occupied.

David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:

> Evil Boris <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I do not follow your reasoning, but I have been acting jet-lagged
>> the last several days [and had other excuses before that ;-].  I
>> just suggest leaving all (math) previews alone, unless and until the
>> point enters it and some modifications are made.  At this point I
>> suggest the preview bitmap gets nuked.
>
> I am not stupid.  I understood your suggestion the first time.  It has
> the disadvantage that one of the most common ways of working with
> previews is doing small edits and regenerating the preview.

I was not commenting on your intelligence, but just trying to make use
I was getting my point across.  It's a personality glitch of mine that
I tend to explain things too many times, sometime contradicting myself
an odd number of times. :)

> Basically your suggestion is to have a changed icon for modified
> previews.  There is merit to that suggestion, and the only drawback is
> that we don't have artwork for it yet.

Something like that.  To be pedantic, for previews where the preview
may no longer match the text under it.  Hmmm... this suggests a
somewhat different solution---leave the preview image alone, but mark
it in some way to indicate it has beem modified.  For example,
underline it, put it in a colored frame, invert it, or whatever.
Something not too obtrusive but visible.  

>  Judging from past experience,
> creating a set of icons in all supported sizes that is visually
> appealing will take several days of work.  If you want to volunteer
> for that, you are welcome.

I might be the world's worst choice for this particular job.  Never
built icons before and have a zilch of visual sense.

>> By the way (and off topic for this thread): How come the usual
>> (non-source-special) way of invoking, say, XDvi, does not require a
>> confirmation (C-c C-c RET is sufficient) but working with source
>> specials turned on you need to confirm the command line?
>
> Uh, is this so?

Yep, seems to do this for me.  Do not know why.  No source specials =>
C-c C-c RET invokes preview.  Yes source specials => C-c C-c RET offers a
long command line to confirm.  Odd.

> They are made to match your text size.  If this is not the case, then
> your font setup is probably faulty and Emacs substitutes some other
> font size, while the previews are made to match the size it could not
> get.
>
> If you want your formulas scaled larger than the text, take a look at
> the manual.

I have mostly played with this on my Windows box.  Since I never
request any particular font (in .emacs or elsewhere) I tend to believe
that Emacs gets the font it asks for.  I might be wrong.  The above
was just my subjective impression.

>>I also dislike mouse and menus of any sort (have menubar, toolbar,
>>scroll bar, and balloons [eh... forgot the right term again] usually
>>turned off).  So various mouse menues attached to formula previews
>>are not spectacularly useful for me personally.
>
> Why?  The tooltip merely announces the presence of the menu on
> mouse-3, but you need to click anyway to get the popup menu.  And
> C-mouse-3 will give a mode dependent popup menu anywhere in the
> buffer.
>
> Or don't you even touch the mouse?

If I am in Emacs I tend to use the keyboard exclusively.  (Have
menubar, toolbar, scrollbar turned off.  At some point I also had
tooltips turned off, not sure about now.  Ah, due to a typo in my
.emacs it is not off.  I dislike Win tooltips.  They sometimes pop up
in strangest places (and times).)  If I am not switching programs, I
do not use the mouse (on my laptop, eraserhead... TrachPoint(TM)) at
all.  In other programs, I am sometimes forced to, as there is not
equivalent keyboard command, or it's too twisted, or I do not remember
what it was.

Oh, well, enough of random ramblings, time to go back to Real
World(TM).

--Boris