[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Underline fontification
From: |
Arash Esbati |
Subject: |
Re: Underline fontification |
Date: |
Tue, 14 Jun 2022 12:45:14 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 |
Hi Hendrik,
Hendrik Rommeswinkel via Discussion list for AUCTeX developers
<auctex-devel@gnu.org> writes:
> I would like to suggest introducing fontification of the \underline
> command and variations thereof from the ulem and soul packages.
Thanks for your suggestion and the patch. In general, I think this is a
good addition while underlinig text in general is not ;-)
I have a minor comment below, though.
What do others think about this change? I also think this change is
small enough that we don't need to go through FSF paperwork.
> git diff origin/master master
> diff --git a/font-latex.el b/font-latex.el
> index 92b6047a..93ae9bb0 100644
> --- a/font-latex.el
> +++ b/font-latex.el
> @@ -431,6 +431,10 @@ variable `font-latex-fontify-sectioning'." ',num)
> ("italic-command"
> (("emph" "{") ("textit" "{") ("textsl" "{") ("mathit" "{"))
> font-latex-italic-face 1 command)
> + ("underline-command"
> + (("underline" "{") ("ul" "{") ("uuline" "{") ("uwave" "{") ("dotuline"
> "{")
> + ("dashuline" "{"))
In font-latex, we only add keywords provided by vanilla LaTeX. Keywords
provided by packages go into the corresponding AUCTeX style file, in
this case style/ulem.el and style/soul.el (which has to written).
Hence, this becomes
(("underline" "{"))
Best, Arash