Re: AUCTeX and "builtin latex mode" integration

[Arash Esbati]

Hi Keita,

Ikumi Keita <ikumi@ikumi.que.jp> writes:

>>>>>> Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> writes:
>> I have to re-read the thread, but wasn't a point also that latex-mode
>> and LaTeX-mode are also confusing to some users?
>
> According to my (unreliable) memory :-),

;-)

> the thread began with a complaint that "I customized latex-mode-hook
> because the mode name is latex-mode, but that customization is
> ignored. Why?"  So the similarity between latex-mode and LaTeX-mode
> doesn't relate directly in this particular case.

Yes, it was about "Unfriendly take-over of AUCTeX once installed", but I
think somewhere in the discussion, there was also sort of
"latex-mode-hook vs. LaTeX-mode-hook is confusing".  At any rate, we
should also have a look at this issue while we're at it.

>> If so, can we think about coming up with mode names instead of
>> camel-case'ing the built-in ones?
>
> Maybe the similarity can be a source of future trouble. However, there
> is already a huge amount of codes with "LaTeX-" prefix in the current
> AUCTeX and I'm afraid that it isn't realistic to rewrite all of them.

I was thinking about the mode names only; and not the namespace for
functions/variables and the file names.  Suppose the major mode is
called AUCLaTeX-mode, then we have `AUCLaTeX-mode-hook' and we then
define an alias `LaTeX-mode-hook' for a certain period of time.  Does
this make sense?

> Thanks, as you can see, it worked well.

👍

Best, Arash