Re: [vile] Vile saves twice

[Thomas Dickey]

On Tue, 10 Mar 2009, Paul van Tilburg wrote:

> Excellent.  I overlook ~force.  Another question.  I now have the
> following macro:
>
> ; Special variant of find-next-error that uses a specific .err file
> ; as error buffer.
> store-procedure find-next-error-from-err-file "move to the next \"error\" in the 
> error file"
>  ~local %cbufname
>  ~local %errfile
>  setv %errfile &cat &path "root" $cfilname ".err"
>  setv %cbufname $cbufname
>  kill-buffer %errfile
>  ~quiet edit-file %errfile
>  error-buffer %errfile
>  buffer %cbufname
>  ~force find-next-error
>  ~if &not $status
>    write-message &cat &cat "[No (more) errors in " %errfile " buffer]"
>  ~endif
> ~endm
> bind-key find-next-error-from-err-file ^X-l
>
> So, in a common situation I edit paper.tex and save it, it will be
> compiled asynchronously and if there are errors they are put in
> paper.err.  Using ^X-l I can jump to an error, fix it and save again to
> trigger a new compile.  However, since paper.err can be changed
> asynchronously, I have to do a kill-buffer and edit-file of %errfile to
> make it reload every time I run the macro, because a plain edit-file
> doesn't seem to reload.  The result is that
> find-next-error-from-err-file will only jump to the first error in
> %errfile, even if it doesn't change between calls.  How can I make it
> reload the file only if it has changed?

I think we need a new builtin-function to provide the information whether 
the file has changed.  vile does know that it's changed, but it's not 
visible to the scripting.  (This isn't a big change to implement...)

Given that, I'd say to reload the file as needed, but to try to make the 
macro a little smarter by then setting the same line-number as it was 
before the reload.  (Though that might not be the best choice, since you'd 
already have fixed some errors).

> Another issue:  sometimes I start vile with several buffers, paper.tex,
> 01chapter1.tex.inc, 02chapter2.tex.inc, etc.  If I'm editing
> 02chapter2.tex.inc, I'd still like ^X-l to examine paper.err, not
> attempt to use 02chapter2.tex.err which will not be generated.  Now, to
> make it even remotely possible to get this working, I can agree to
> always have the main file, in this case paper.tex, as the first file
> on the commond line, but I am not sure how I can fix %errfile for this
> session.  Any ideas/suggestions?

Some - to make vile see the first file on the command-line as the "first"
buffer", you'd turn autobuffer off.  (You could in principle do this in
the macro, though I'm not sure if it would be a nice behavior to make it
restore the autobuffer setting on exit from the macro...).  Then the
macro could use "for-buffers" to call a macro that checks for the 
existence of the ".err" file, e.g,. something like

        {unset %errfile}
        for-buffers {macro to test if %errfile is unset, or if file exists, set 
%errfile}
        {test if %errfile is set}
                error-buffer %errfile

> If I can solve the above two issues, this would lead to the perfect
> (La)TeX editing setup for me.  I hope I can attain it. :)
>
> Kind regards,
> Paul
>
> --
> PhD Student @ Eindhoven                     | email: address@hidden
> University of Technology, The Netherlands   | JID: address@hidden
> > > > Using the Power of Debian GNU/Linux <<< | GnuPG key ID: 0x50064181
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> vile mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/vile

--
Thomas E. Dickey
http://invisible-island.net
ftp://invisible-island.net