Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2025 07:37:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 11 03:37:02 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46115 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uPG18-0006BE-7w for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:37:02 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:52870) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uPG15-000691-Ej for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:36:59 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uPG0u-0007nw-LP for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:36:48 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uPG0s-0003s3-2B; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:36:47 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-55324e35f49so6437441e87.3; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749627400; x=1750232200; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ibREudmxaDk2nRzoMq7KfiHEQbxBFg+N05yDmwY5+Fg=; b=OkH2FFCOaJnMx40JFupYW+X1yzW7e8rcFnXhuHoH5zNmSvU6d9JFxuqI9paLCKc4Br sKJLx8Cnxf7sE1LeWRCL80apMQjVgy2wwsviMmPCo3oShz+sx4SeDly5TyBqY5jHE69h WAFVlvt44UeOPtk14BkQu82pvszFX+TAMju9GJoajB0nopbT/fU6QAaIPe5r38J9TK5I wCrNhFfMUcVwygm+kCm5Y/lLI07hne45n28h9/YuQcOf370EAUAvCaFeNXODYoX6/pDw qlFWnd5DBKsN9CPM9nt2gqWJ/EerFm6++/tLcbkS3WfimFMFC7oe2pSp8hNduvAWwAfZ lw+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749627400; x=1750232200; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ibREudmxaDk2nRzoMq7KfiHEQbxBFg+N05yDmwY5+Fg=; b=I4Wh+zk1EY9alN3qFCVOIh3TrSgip7UPMD4aq8SjPgGoxbzZktO5tMcXrRv2wCiJ8J uGm1k9e+Fkp9oIojpqhVwGBvwaPEM/6/Eay4jAM+xyh4Si2S0jF0RxU06+pIqK6IUgJn 5iJGPzAc7TREOFixPuTiBwGiThl8nsg60iJBg+3uN/OVOpRxSpI1zkVjhug+Lr7ZUcG6 rUQlzEQUeawBLmtGUYPKfM2nB1yIIqrwegdghGYYVO8BjIvOuUCb9YvbCxLyoslcND9N M2nY2I4Di4QzXROGAwqX2DWQKx0tDoCVMHZ5Ku1RCpIe+4pl/CLyit6XpQYm5RmDcmGS 0S7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzMf+q8GOkGlkalorsTY2YeYYO6Dw2qRM0i+yg+q/8W/A+PxjvZ y9XvTBsEnSCPxE4sfNzs3gcFUc1PhFREhWLnppG7loq5BX8JKAC6fUemcGX3QFcK X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnct85fUJT1EfWW7Uh3MCaVvDs0lC+5LO2sxgW9aAylBlpwEAWXQz4PAEYe55TfC gWseUSBaZaAOzCpKjV9xYgIJhzo0OFHP+J75F4K0F6DmmEkiXTHEVaM59asH+x8FzktZG65a8pe biceQCD1AODTDEUqoATy9FOMt8dP2IFd2/bTTd5oenUdbckeANfbp9D18R7Q5S5bzRVrZa6ewn4 TglOZfm/y3XE0F0YeAQTUHa9SBtBrLHDP8Lj0gJ7IQUokXEQ7AjG6JnHeZZ21HsyNkfJxIza4QS xG70TpfmQJ4fxH+cnfQLozWwxnCwQOYEQANJcPD7n43/6MQtU0lVmLnoRhDV++t8Myw= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG8KJbaKE1JLj8sll+4Wz4TDjjrsDkMXHuZYrIhrvHkwHq+fY0Zx4L7ukS1eFQB4IhHulfGHg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:4006:b0:553:28b8:eecb with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5539c23931bmr780191e87.38.1749627399524; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([185.229.155.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-553676d0ee3sm1844636e87.8.2025.06.11.00.36.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> To: Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#78693: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <m2a56eag2o.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Arash Esbati on Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:32:47 +0200) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:36:38 +0200 Message-ID: <uxsg7t8qlyloft.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::12b; envelope-from=ultrono@HIDDEN; helo=mail-lf1-x12b.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: bug-auctex@HIDDEN, 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, rahguzar@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> writes: > somehow 3 bug reports where opened for this report which I'm merging > now. Please try to avoid this in future. TIA. Thanks. For future reference, the issue is that I was CC'd on the original bug (and responded to that message, causing a cascade of new bugs), but the correct approach (as I've now learned) is to use the X-Debbugs-CC pseudo-header (https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting).
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2025 07:36:54 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 11 03:36:53 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46112 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uPG0u-000690-CG for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:36:53 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x12d.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::12d]:45178) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uPG0s-00068f-As for 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:36:46 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5533302b49bso6589150e87.2 for <78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749627400; x=1750232200; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ibREudmxaDk2nRzoMq7KfiHEQbxBFg+N05yDmwY5+Fg=; b=W62ma/z4tm+Als0YnYysg+Jczudl4tLZhPL4Dbyc45AZk7X3vv9tCPdSmvaxu2adKc q5GSf1gOraC0z5RyV0Jt3TqZ0gg2c2/z2rnbYIGlgjo6MgO6iGwab7Z8g/64RAK/91Kp P8+u9aKd352sRO/5HyhwxJTmnEcsTdgb8Fxf9DlTb0m8Ij/rQCjOavnL5X+bz0T4R5NH kuCUB5WamxoDHMhJI2hWSGA7hBSa1of6dIHtzSGyqv5zBn6XmG2FIEuMnoNfBU/8sjle QqS3an99xg/7TpmCOAZ8iGVJ8uu/XNCaB1xJOOMyX8LCypHTQ0hJqTPg9CadljojBTLe XGfg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749627400; x=1750232200; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ibREudmxaDk2nRzoMq7KfiHEQbxBFg+N05yDmwY5+Fg=; b=pbgqmGlFthVink5mqA/533d4Bj+aieaEokn8dbrVb/vI046v6QkJEqWTN2Fsy6HloH flYTVhlFwhV3kRxXQZ6Xvc7zYSsIHplks29GZV92IB+xlYzXBG3DHa7Do6R8mw3kOsBm h6SJNzZH3N/DdKLr6ioVPQGaieJAy5oHuXWs3gDH1vL5wpaFGKNcvOcAD+GdDg+4b3/o X+u936YKb/KZm95SygVTUo3ApBDAK/nRZ9UmM6UTZznpE8b9yUjoIXNDITfuQSN2j5mg 6xPfSs8Wv4rmG1DI8CKEFqZT4cYuVUilWPR8MGyEJdtneZI1dBDkiaIBuP7DCMOd4YSX Bhlg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWxOMcksgLaL4fn0NvXIWy5HqA+b0ea1xdiNbDQdB70y3sGU3KmDhAswDFk/x1EyPS+OeqVvA==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzREXd28RUA+gzvXMq+SEMekjGkLJgBuhkyH9ZcebenQqkqj9KS xkGiDCmRoxUodHmHmLheRDxEZ/nyHpAJYkFI6/BQt1rB0qRbtq/efoEN X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncu5Dus/DHLiW3GqmwbJSk9f+vXsAmHwoXIzWZJ/itAiQOzkNJG5Hau0g0SSTzP ToDCAMX07Jxp95xgmv/8Vv3F3VwxVvk7StEAjQug5+gZ7yM66WHlXI13Plj1MFnfaoSmJvgtaix rG67+pVIWwOJABGLH1cJwrZhtvfouOS60SH9ODkfezk2GhkKiJqie9WDAs+i5MxM2xb1IJ/oaca +8Q58HTXcluGRqOmZCyIpfGjo94q6VdLUKkchy+MqqsMCrwqFlnQYLo8xv+KmMGFeT8FodcoQM4 eXwiR1ALGVgQ/QF7nqrYe04xqu3ncwk+fY3wElCWm2VjUuQyqb546Mk9lfMu9IflXVQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG8KJbaKE1JLj8sll+4Wz4TDjjrsDkMXHuZYrIhrvHkwHq+fY0Zx4L7ukS1eFQB4IhHulfGHg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:4006:b0:553:28b8:eecb with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5539c23931bmr780191e87.38.1749627399524; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([185.229.155.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-553676d0ee3sm1844636e87.8.2025.06.11.00.36.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) From: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> To: Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#78693: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <m2a56eag2o.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Arash Esbati on Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:32:47 +0200) Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:36:38 +0200 Message-ID: <uxsg7t8qlyloft.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693 Cc: bug-auctex@HIDDEN, 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, rahguzar@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> writes: > somehow 3 bug reports where opened for this report which I'm merging > now. Please try to avoid this in future. TIA. Thanks. For future reference, the issue is that I was CC'd on the original bug (and responded to that message, causing a cascade of new bugs), but the correct approach (as I've now learned) is to use the X-Debbugs-CC pseudo-header (https://www.debian.org/Bugs/Reporting).
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN>
to control <at> debbugs.gnu.org.
Full text available.Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2025 07:33:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 11 03:33:02 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46094 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uPFxG-0005rv-9H for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:33:02 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50748) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <arash@HIDDEN>) id 1uPFxC-0005r6-EA; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:32:59 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <arash@HIDDEN>) id 1uPFx5-0003Ly-GT; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:32:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=NysgRVepcoa4om6ZRH31MxnH0ZdI8rt6BaILKhV3idM=; b=eQ0B1IC3y/Rw+zl8WN+G 32R8aJbyodcIp/fG4eWBWaMy2o4wucASCsEJHYpf+FT9HnX5A/d250nTgzOxB+RsrrEjlJ2+InV7+ MSJnsqhIj35/S3PAZvqxT6rk7pzgyuJxZUTtmX1+JDdjb6R45Tpc9KL9KWh9bQyGY7fUfbrmTmqVu taNNBRYiNkzBHrbPzn5VLS9Bw7R8LHmOMi4wXa7D1R0GGkaNZckWTQdbZlXH675ODGwtr8r5CAH1s 7AJnuWfOZ+Hv6jpZCfmv87csYGC34IOUeKmHvemhtLjZEt+4bnPC3WtlK98SQD7YE9XLiBzKlOetw XkPqZzmQwrRDSg==; From: Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> To: Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX <bug-auctex@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#78693: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:32:47 +0200 Message-ID: <m2a56eag2o.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693 Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>, ultrono@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) forcemerge 78693 78696 78698 thanks Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX <bug-auctex@HIDDEN> writes: > Dear AucTeX maintainers, > > The commits > > d0a57d8d Fix math macro folding to not consume subsequent brackets > 33f9eb07 Fix TeX macro end detection in some edge cases > > break the folding of math macros with a function spec. Gents, somehow 3 bug reports where opened for this report which I'm merging now. Please try to avoid this in future. TIA. Best, Arash
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2025 07:33:16 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 11 03:33:16 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46096 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uPFxU-0005sp-0b for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:33:16 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:43636) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <arash@HIDDEN>) id 1uPFxD-0005r7-12 for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:32:59 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <arash@HIDDEN>) id 1uPFx7-0007SE-BJ for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:32:53 -0400 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <arash@HIDDEN>) id 1uPFx5-0003Ly-GT; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:32:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=NysgRVepcoa4om6ZRH31MxnH0ZdI8rt6BaILKhV3idM=; b=eQ0B1IC3y/Rw+zl8WN+G 32R8aJbyodcIp/fG4eWBWaMy2o4wucASCsEJHYpf+FT9HnX5A/d250nTgzOxB+RsrrEjlJ2+InV7+ MSJnsqhIj35/S3PAZvqxT6rk7pzgyuJxZUTtmX1+JDdjb6R45Tpc9KL9KWh9bQyGY7fUfbrmTmqVu taNNBRYiNkzBHrbPzn5VLS9Bw7R8LHmOMi4wXa7D1R0GGkaNZckWTQdbZlXH675ODGwtr8r5CAH1s 7AJnuWfOZ+Hv6jpZCfmv87csYGC34IOUeKmHvemhtLjZEt+4bnPC3WtlK98SQD7YE9XLiBzKlOetw XkPqZzmQwrRDSg==; From: Arash Esbati <arash@HIDDEN> To: Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX <bug-auctex@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#78693: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN> References: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:32:47 +0200 Message-ID: <m2a56eag2o.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>, ultrono@HIDDEN X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) forcemerge 78693 78696 78698 thanks Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX <bug-auctex@HIDDEN> writes: > Dear AucTeX maintainers, > > The commits > > d0a57d8d Fix math macro folding to not consume subsequent brackets > 33f9eb07 Fix TeX macro end detection in some edge cases > > break the folding of math macros with a function spec. Gents, somehow 3 bug reports where opened for this report which I'm merging now. Please try to avoid this in future. TIA. Best, Arash
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jun 2025 18:03:42 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jun 09 14:03:42 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57052 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uOgqU-0007Wm-0m for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2025 14:03:42 -0400 Received: from mout-p-202.mailbox.org ([80.241.56.172]:56564) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <rahguzar@HIDDEN>) id 1uOgqQ-0007Vr-2A for 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2025 14:03:39 -0400 Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [IPv6:2001:67c:2050:b231:465::2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mout-p-202.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bGKXv1xHLz9stK; Mon, 9 Jun 2025 20:03:27 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org; s=mail20150812; t=1749492207; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=GDRWjCWoJKsRmwmUBwxGYKJsb6CRSjmfDBA9Z7HKsEs=; b=vnVRsD+3T3L3d6nsiNBLdoB4NDmk1g4ufGldFEH5E+ySoSPFsau5Hr2DmhEuCgPTvYJGRY Kz3Ndd9CdBYVQRqXMhCZ2I922vPxVHFvy5bHipGCJE9UjNLD/h4A2imnPhm7I9xkJn8f4K dJBZ45XLQqnSfxFFgTl6/rsk042pRBSkfKkzmO+fSBzMq/prHeBrNIAW0/TZCHOORp8mFQ LnbD4TqT5SWCdzDHVd2d/JgjDKsrYvXciHuZYiiwCGhXUD3top5m6NiX+a2hARvfntmSZq jWTFHctvLlGSXlJPknZHEsdL8xjTzVIMPCYuCAHBeA1WMbF+RYBOfGxFPaYoNQ== From: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN> To: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <uxsg7t8qm3v1uy.fsf@HIDDEN> (Paul D. Nelson's message of "Sat, 07 Jun 2025 20:32:53 +0200") References: <uxsg7t8qm3v1uy.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2025 23:03:18 +0500 Message-ID: <87o6uw3i8p.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MBO-RS-ID: de8411df30011669d63 X-MBO-RS-META: 57ohc37tjzp7nydnt8hqen4b4hh7obca X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693 Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Hi Paul, "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> writes: > Hi Raghuzar, > >> Currently if the spec is a function it only receives the mandatory >> arguments. If the number of arguments is part of the spec we can allow >> it to receive up to p+q args without breaking existing code. > > Regarding optional arguments, I am in the habit of extracting those > using TeX-fold-macro-nth-arg. This is possible because (with recent > enough AUCTeX) the function display spec is always called with point at > the beginning of the macro to be folded. See for instance the > implementation of TeX-fold-cite-display. > > For this reason, I'm inclined to first implement the proposal without > changing how optional args are used - we could change that later, if > desired. I think the difference between passing optional arg now vs later would be backward compatibility. Since the the signature part of spec is new there are no backward compatibility concerns. However if people start using the feature assuming no optional arguments are passed to the function and we start passing them later there can be breakage. I think passing the arguments directly to the function is more user friendly. However, I think documenting TeX-fold-macro-nth-arg as the way to access optional arguments is also good enough. > > Thanks, best, > Paul Best, Rahguzar
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jun 2025 18:33:05 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 07 14:33:05 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49578 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1uNyLp-0002fm-4r for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 14:33:05 -0400 Received: from mail-lj1-x236.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::236]:56491) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uNyLn-0002el-D2 for 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 14:33:04 -0400 Received: by mail-lj1-x236.google.com with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-32ac42bb4e4so27223491fa.0 for <78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 11:33:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749321177; x=1749925977; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5AjDPgiiFCZ/JlNSUtSXOf8dD/gjPnCHl6HOml11Wiw=; b=FJvfJwD2yipAF15X98IVQjzRwBsu8KnP4d1If+NYBNT2W2XEHNaxCAwGzCyXlv8P9u 8NGN/7v+UOXxRJ1fGw3OvB9iI1+WbBzT3I/EhfUhNzfXVnjeLOlt10MuNqnkOjdY/I9P 9UlAJyIfG0IIAl+r/Pn+qeM4EIgLksa+4NGOtcY+vuRpPcf9OwHq9bli+yqVjF52mUrv fBeVVlAEJtJsjZGBj/c0buaXNySuXHx6fGbaUrfsCVPt8Nqtqzk47kxu8xovbFk8a/t2 pCRQi5wgwEeUnIQxjZBcNZNsTAdEAWEPWHOwDQ+5J5kk5Yb64O033H8UAsFfm4amf+pj ASSw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749321177; x=1749925977; h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5AjDPgiiFCZ/JlNSUtSXOf8dD/gjPnCHl6HOml11Wiw=; b=UMYVSaS0Ly37r/GeqDlsIL1BisioTgep9Jhdae5TH2LzPgccwXM0/0loVzE28OyPIz n0jVW7uc5DfQBYKlz8KytbMlat1DnhL5VMH5vtu6fzOHrcW/VRaun/dqKyp088tzC+KD s4rXY1iFWLVOp8UBpO3CTQq5ZqEnRaQMj4V/7bPt2it4OYKUFAfVGIMl/DRVkbGyLTSg 9WWMwwWMNDLKoHNVNH1RAvtEnmfdXzQGpj6y2wVVA11CFv0AbUQcH8oh3QBeQNS2O+1N OmQV3tARxq9tsPNMiXg0Tt2WjJHEntY5RssIGsbXhpseGSvff/BY8gkm43Ov6xOLoEgO 0AOQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzBFePX8LTZyvx12bG5+ywDHyPVT/zAAeAhEwwNFjiwJVrZstaj o3T4lRGDUgkfA3tkTUu4ulkhGc6I3uSBiRN8BfLrDNOAlGUHCuyHzV6tXIUKGpKB X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncv+1rEwODIb361eGk9iB7yj71HdXcwuS/Cdg3KiMmlgcPRK0JZuf6PLZCdPg7A X33fRRcyG/PlRCXsznzPMLWyGXQwssJUvnJdaJFyNYnbRV0ArY0CZDcFEd+ofJm+MBScyayPAif bevXKcHelI0qINozjddnoo6z9Ks478APGxAABG2UzrnBmThvJEnWf7YfBSzogPdcQ/KtxIfx5xN OPxvn6bq/dQaFwD4JAU8rhzy9cHbFASdfUhoKPFyaccrAlJIfBMvkZWjzvkMJf6T0Ux2nXzm+Eb MGstave9i3sAE2ErUY6A70g2qmGon2dy6+/bfluMC2Fprx4maQsOCKXg X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGA8HDE8OSYwWD7o3KNj2FZ2b1qpakF++/Jwejh4GgWshMNCsHxpRECUETPtkO78q5g6Sh/zg== X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b88c:0:b0:32a:943d:e43 with SMTP id 38308e7fff4ca-32adfb68040mr19041231fa.22.1749321176599; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 11:32:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([185.229.155.48]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 38308e7fff4ca-32ae1d0367asm5433471fa.114.2025.06.07.11.32.54 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 07 Jun 2025 11:32:55 -0700 (PDT) From: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> To: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <87bjqzihj5.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Rahguzar on Sat, 07 Jun 2025 22:32:46 +0500) Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2025 20:32:53 +0200 Message-ID: <uxsg7t8qm3v1uy.fsf@HIDDEN> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693 Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hi Raghuzar, > I like this proposal. It is backward compatible I think it should also > allow us to deal with optional arguments in a function spec. OK, great. I'll try fleshing it out when I get the chance. > Currently if the spec is a function it only receives the mandatory > arguments. If the number of arguments is part of the spec we can allow > it to receive up to p+q args without breaking existing code. Regarding optional arguments, I am in the habit of extracting those using TeX-fold-macro-nth-arg. This is possible because (with recent enough AUCTeX) the function display spec is always called with point at the beginning of the macro to be folded. See for instance the implementation of TeX-fold-cite-display. For this reason, I'm inclined to first implement the proposal without changing how optional args are used - we could change that later, if desired. Thanks, best, Paul
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.
Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Jun 2025 17:33:07 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jun 07 13:33:07 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49487 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1uNxPn-0005PP-0f
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 13:33:07 -0400
Received: from mout-p-201.mailbox.org ([80.241.56.171]:46124)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <rahguzar@HIDDEN>)
id 1uNxPj-0005Oj-DY
for 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Jun 2025 13:33:05 -0400
Received: from smtp102.mailbox.org (smtp102.mailbox.org [10.196.197.102])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by mout-p-201.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bF4yX3bqfz9sv0;
Sat, 7 Jun 2025 19:32:52 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org;
s=mail20150812; t=1749317572;
h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type:
content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:
in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references;
bh=NDQ1KzOARol7YNDCdaZib2p8qVBy88eRSld3WMP1LM4=;
b=XqbwbkcmaQyQT8/311KsUYFQzVL2Xy/RKAvoGq/cx/rDu9TiIKCYruVyc1p+eeLeIlZabh
wTo63DN3HvYfTQfZnrNIqUM1bDUUG/IupaE52k+YXC4yRq79p8ElEnPPZvn/0ZTk3TYuBs
quzuehQIxBx0PyMPq9LzewPUw6knCmXgmjQOi2x++8ru6io4ZbkSqJyAXormrqDvakG8JI
SY0F6Jl4FDJr8IUTDDfE2C7O4VFy4S/7Ao66/RNe+kbmASak+yWmJcSiQq8m2kpmuyeSPU
6g+2jgp46wIh1WV8wFaMsXAApLxh7e3xHm7BK4II6cp+suFMDAWPvDuVQra60w==
From: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>
To: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken
In-Reply-To: <uxsg7tikl9us3s.fsf@HIDDEN> (Paul D. Nelson's message of "Fri,
06 Jun 2025 11:39:03 +0200")
References: <uxsg7tikl9us3s.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 07 Jun 2025 22:32:46 +0500
Message-ID: <87bjqzihj5.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MBO-RS-META: 7dsrkznw9w3reic36zezy3fcneoik1q1
X-MBO-RS-ID: 0c8c111011a08c621fa
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693
Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-)
Hi Paul,
"Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN> writes:
> Here's a proposed solution that seems more robust to me. Recall that
> *macro*/*math* are lists consisting of items
>
> (SPEC (M1 M2 ...)),
>
> where SPEC is a display specification (an integer, a string or a
> function) and M1, M2, ... are macro names as strings. We could enhance
> the display specification to allow
>
> ((SPEC . SIG) (M1 M2 ...)),
>
> where SIG is a "signature" that restricts the number of args:
>
> - nil means no restriction,
>
> - an integer n means at most n total args (so 0 means unargumented), and
>
> - a cons cell (p . q) means at most p optional and q required args.
>
> With that enhancement, we could revert d0a57d8d and tag the defaults for
> LaTeX-fold-math-spec-list with "0", e.g.,
>
> ("=E2=88=88" ("in")) -> (("=E2=88=88" . 0) ("in"))
>
> That would fix the original "\in [0,1]" issue as well as the issue
> raised by Raghuzar. It would also make it easy to fix related issues,
> like the one with \mathbf noted above. Thoughts?
I like this proposal. It is backward compatible I think it should also
allow us to deal with optional arguments in a function spec. Currently
if the spec is a function it only receives the mandatory arguments. If
the number of arguments is part of the spec we can allow it to receive
up to p+q args without breaking existing code.
> Finally, I noticed that we've been CC'ing bug-auctex rather than the
> specific bug number, which is generating duplicated bugs at
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-auctex/2025-06/threads.html.
> I've tried to fix that here.
Thanks for catching this. I was surprised by emails about those new bugs.
Rahguzar
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.
Received: (at 78693) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jun 2025 09:39:16 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jun 06 05:39:16 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41933 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1uNTXf-0007FV-Qw
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2025 05:39:16 -0400
Received: from mail-lf1-x129.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::129]:48529)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uNTXc-0007FG-DV
for 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 06 Jun 2025 05:39:13 -0400
Received: by mail-lf1-x129.google.com with SMTP id
2adb3069b0e04-5532f9ac219so2247922e87.1
for <78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 06 Jun 2025 02:39:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749202746; x=1749807546; darn=debbugs.gnu.org;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to
:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=k3rsnAXSjdviPk90cgvn7rkGoHh7+ndrwqx8KmIPztA=;
b=FwRkbJLaJGtDyNayKnEPsCsBbjjhque9hCddEeF8q9Ey6SJNvoh2lmxPPLH0QY4dca
uEcxJX5EbWch/eZHXy8wc4a/W477Dv56O2PAPI4C3DL4FsfoHXnVJ9zIU59s9fS3oEmb
P5sD/sJJkK/YHQ7CDmUQ/PVW61gvUVh48CNrfOdmc72i72gbjVnLQeg1DnrAiFC7YLAs
kISkAzJ8x9ykxeo1Foo+iKTlrwzv2mFg4iotJZVbIktfPAwk9cz1IQQ3uT94vCsKwAFD
cf0kgQJaPM0wwLxHy3HHwX+Yx/O3iYocXIN40hdXgBsWS2kXKamN9saFTtYwQ2qN8v0D
KZMA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749202746; x=1749807546;
h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to
:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date
:message-id:reply-to;
bh=k3rsnAXSjdviPk90cgvn7rkGoHh7+ndrwqx8KmIPztA=;
b=UU2GOqoSKEDQZPMoZtuZC1JdJVXWHx2TN3kn6E7zR1dY5Ycyr8jFg9cMSWkwnpFDiy
b3wbNVEwbdUdvQP6wDrDIy3fxsWIDesdTl/IhidUv1FnesGrsCb2NLl1ImsegLuzBUZX
YTvAW5/ZZHZgjvCYBxiLNDXJ0f6fP8Yp1dVdNu2PNztGHxaukQb0Vz9audM73HvyKIJA
H/EMokKiFpb+OS9vwdtO/ZC53c9PXNPRZM2klY10yvpX0WdPhw92smJ4AAOIOM6ABZri
RLy4dSkb2B9gYSXibYn5J3qKyp9nnBiI0OOJY29oqZSfm5i1dhQ5bxPyBBcA8LAq01X3
ErLQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YztCmh2CW0LBmO/Z1b52TO7wk+C8/tbBOBcBhiTH3kTAzM1mB5u
MqKXIO+V5nVwqdDz3O57PW1dtU4Rxq0gT2nRHF+Bntrmf1XM/2map1xD
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncui8RK032SbXNPMFuVY2rj8WXt4mKYRPZ4JURihwF5USFfRWiApzj+hDlASmZl
7WddzrK5tyx7WZe1r7rj3sRiPOlU1zaLMT9b7Ke25mtVbf4quCrBwEoJtE3XZsI9mGbFyI8lYIk
5fOeFWZl9ZF3pTBaZHCDG0pcy9Jptp0Hefm8xhLwsI2gT//7gC4dgp3c9PoNqQctNZWk/U1COqQ
h2APtRyCfCi3AOjnvn3Fu+N28o+0bOf+Jzh8immsNB3Q8RrLmSve9DjY1EsI0WSsp7NClgFRcJV
GCcZL85i0hA5karMfRoCKEbdD4gxnKescgUITSZN3shaDdWAc+q+AXruRQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG0TURswVQ5hsBurXkL+2WO2x9UDxaSbZgYSvImmfro2DlyhpwyglYxwKzdMLhkV5yl7iDiqQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3d03:b0:553:2418:8c0c with SMTP id
2adb3069b0e04-55366c39e0cmr587546e87.57.1749202745335;
Fri, 06 Jun 2025 02:39:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([131.164.245.154])
by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id
2adb3069b0e04-553676d7638sm136031e87.83.2025.06.06.02.39.04
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Fri, 06 Jun 2025 02:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN>
To: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken
In-Reply-To: <877c1qlu6l.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Rahguzar on Thu, 05
Jun 2025 08:54:26 +0500)
Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2025 11:39:03 +0200
Message-ID: <uxsg7tikl9us3s.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: 3.6 (+++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hi Raghuzar, thanks for your suggestions. Regarding (1) and
(2), I searched my shared tex projects and found examples that those approaches
would not fold correctly: > 1) Assume that there is no white-space between
the macro name and the > brackets enclosing the arguments. This is probably
not how TeX syntax > works but I think (not too sure about this) it is the
[...] Content analysis details: (3.6 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[131.164.245.154 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (ultrono[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:129 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 78693
Cc: 78693 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: 2.6 (++)
X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org",
has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original
message has been attached to this so you can view it or label
similar future email. If you have any questions, see
the administrator of that system for details.
Content preview: Hi Raghuzar, thanks for your suggestions. Regarding (1) and
(2), I searched my shared tex projects and found examples that those approaches
would not fold correctly: > 1) Assume that there is no white-space between
the macro name and the > brackets enclosing the arguments. This is probably
not how TeX syntax > works but I think (not too sure about this) it is the
[...]
Content analysis details: (2.6 points, 10.0 required)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust
[2a00:1450:4864:20:0:0:0:129 listed in]
[list.dnswl.org]
3.6 RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS RBL: Received via a relay in Spamhaus SBL-CSS
[131.164.245.154 listed in zen.spamhaus.org]
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail
provider (ultrono[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
-1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list
manager
Hi Raghuzar, thanks for your suggestions.
Regarding (1) and (2), I searched my shared tex projects and found
examples that those approaches would not fold correctly:
> 1) Assume that there is no white-space between the macro name and the
> brackets enclosing the arguments. This is probably not how TeX syntax
> works but I think (not too sure about this) it is the usual style. This
> behavior can be controlled by a custom variable.
"\in[0,1]"
I also worry that style like
\includegraphics
[width=3D0.8\textwidth]
{result.pdf}
is not too uncommon.
> 2) Since the problem is with optional arguments we can allow { after the
> macro name but not [.
"\in{\rm SL}_2"
> 3) Another option can be to introduce a new spec alist for macros
> without optional args.
Maybe call it TeX-fold-unargumented-spec-list. Then, we would have:
TeX-fold-macro-spec-list
TeX-fold-math-spec-list
TeX-fold-env-spec-list
TeX-fold-unargumented-spec-list
The defaults for *math* would move to *unargumented* and *macro*/*math*
would behave identically. This seems a bit complicated.
Moreover, none of the above solutions address related (but rarer) issues
with argumented macros. For instance, if one includes \mathbf in
*macro*/*math*, then the following folds incorrectly:
$\mathbf{text} [0,1]$
(I feel like I've seen similar examples occur organically over the
years, but can't quickly think of one.)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a proposed solution that seems more robust to me. Recall that
*macro*/*math* are lists consisting of items
(SPEC (M1 M2 ...)),
where SPEC is a display specification (an integer, a string or a
function) and M1, M2, ... are macro names as strings. We could enhance
the display specification to allow
((SPEC . SIG) (M1 M2 ...)),
where SIG is a "signature" that restricts the number of args:
- nil means no restriction,
- an integer n means at most n total args (so 0 means unargumented), and
- a cons cell (p . q) means at most p optional and q required args.
With that enhancement, we could revert d0a57d8d and tag the defaults for
LaTeX-fold-math-spec-list with "0", e.g.,
("=E2=88=88" ("in")) -> (("=E2=88=88" . 0) ("in"))
That would fix the original "\in [0,1]" issue as well as the issue
raised by Raghuzar. It would also make it easy to fix related issues,
like the one with \mathbf noted above. Thoughts?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I also thought I'd link the original proposal [1] for TeX-fold
math-spec-list. My reading is that the purpose of the *macro*/*math*
split was just to better organize the defaults.
[1]
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/auctex-devel/2007-01/msg00078.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, I noticed that we've been CC'ing bug-auctex rather than the
specific bug number, which is generating duplicated bugs at
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-auctex/2025-06/threads.html.
I've tried to fix that here.
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2025 10:32:23 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 04 06:32:23 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47651 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1uMlPy-0005hW-Sc
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 06:32:23 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:54224)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uMlPv-0005h3-VS
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 06:32:20 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uMlPp-0004w2-J8
for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 06:32:13 -0400
Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::230])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <ultrono@HIDDEN>) id 1uMlPn-0006g8-Ku
for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 06:32:13 -0400
Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id
38308e7fff4ca-3105ef2a08dso55208461fa.0
for <bug-auctex@HIDDEN>; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:32:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749033130; x=1749637930; darn=gnu.org;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from:from:to
:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9AS3n6R4jfnvaDM5RJ0RzshwYQim/zCVvO9Bgk59Bjw=;
b=ZUxJd0QhbzcWfI7C7EE4gfGPTHr7KDwshg9XaqmCIE12HFmCpc4J5gd/a5hJBWWS/s
94bhVkckt4COfWk4CnA1ON/QhTfoNMbTAzoiaYVSVfzhElvY39sUUYvtrWdYshx6fFyw
2a20cxRZZlU7pVfOBgxKxT+xfOXUotXfiscYCkH5IU6cYn7Z/sQ4mk+v5vPJ7imtp5yw
rfNQKn02Lr8bu+ms25vcDY1B2Fygmdz/lNhkLHjo/KCzqyMWxVZMOmyhtwYV0uya2ey7
5SOMUJRk1fwj+J0KTcdoJcM5Liy2xQAodYIuw92P+Vqa+t3xur49WcnAmpRgJAZZMyT6
3DBQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749033130; x=1749637930;
h=mime-version:message-id:date:in-reply-to:subject:cc:to:from
:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to;
bh=9AS3n6R4jfnvaDM5RJ0RzshwYQim/zCVvO9Bgk59Bjw=;
b=iqKQR+bpH4F+rOSWmQeKqAXGYI7ftNGw6IAohwlNYHjRbqr73tK8pqzxPRmp+33o2w
sT6G2cspFYwDH3qg7ow5ErfNaiKmQTIM6x9nmXlNbWZTfnQtMvwdbHxve7bipmFPpoxY
gon2Bp83rbhs/8NMawVRl7UiJiGIXm4ej1gm47gu8w0oVx7gNKelGW1sTDhRxaJuBc9r
3UzySF+PjSxDdSBTn8odlyGmuM6e4Hz6YiRbEJV0/B5j4DYtyX6b9hE5XDxoQ9DNnl9g
ad5sxNN3RVDfariZWJKbl8GKIZYAM6nVWVFfViRo5RTF5uNljZB9BkPC1bnkQ/Mw4Fzk
5n6Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YySQXQsNtU2BBzF/KCTegSzT/x+OrdnIFyxQIDMxWvaF4ZQBnBd
MkxQA+/MYvj5lgtmvQ/QG8YxNNhWa1ZSq0Ep1Le1j6c/kL53ORlfHceo
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncszIrY5FVEWIGj5z9HtQrCkYxOqgwMY7VESMmfbTEUrRzp67ryCZ4bgY3muiJU
8qWLsbyOTyqMjadUnYi+E2TPF3W/T94fiN31BccVMFG/5wy1/eA/RiWm36s79sLGRvcsO6I9l4C
G0Bw/RPIxBSWBIEv0tiacw7LGcTbX0yxZvWghIcLKafn4uxw6wJKHvQuTtfGWMYHAb59DoBSB9s
lPS75axI+GoMMhRpfO/7ooKZ4E+Ch+kG1iMk5SS0DnhwSMmmqcpLq64ZWgtg2GFis87kiMyOkHx
DyN6KaRcFLNi8a3ghuw+pvq7mH7wDz1mF+S1mqKOfzLnC+ET+os8IKb3giOLnY/U+0pax9f1vFc
n1W1UldKJ9P30hCuMBtjBH299jgfhbQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IErFpJSigw5Fg06S8X5DbolxoNHU33PuIEKmwuL4q0RazKPrr2PZIr1Lxr6maDFHIRVinaa6Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:b8c6:0:b0:32a:7f39:1a2a with SMTP id
38308e7fff4ca-32ac71d986fmr6142971fa.16.1749033129581;
Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (wlan-eduroam-130-237-240-154.su.se.
[130.237.240.154]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id
38308e7fff4ca-32a85bd26e5sm20847551fa.96.2025.06.04.03.32.08
(version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256);
Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Paul D. Nelson" <ultrono@HIDDEN>
To: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken
In-Reply-To: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN> (message from Rahguzar on Wed, 04
Jun 2025 13:48:28 +0500)
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 12:32:08 +0200
Message-ID: <uxsg7tzfenvluf.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::230;
envelope-from=ultrono@HIDDEN; helo=mail-lj1-x230.google.com
X-Spam_score_int: -20
X-Spam_score: -2.1
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: bug-auctex@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
Thanks Raghuzar. The issue is the result of this change:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
diff --git a/tex-fold.el b/tex-fold.el
index 766270ef..78e5b822 100644
--- a/tex-fold.el
+++ b/tex-fold.el
@@ -901,6 +901,12 @@ TYPE can be either `env' for environments, `macro' for macros or
(goto-char (1+ start))
(LaTeX-find-matching-end)
(point))
+ ((eq type 'math)
+ (goto-char (1+ start))
+ (if (zerop (skip-chars-forward "A-Za-z@"))
+ (forward-char)
+ (skip-chars-forward "*"))
+ (point))
(t
(goto-char start)
(TeX-find-macro-end)))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
The intent here was that "math macros" built-in to tex-fold don't take
arguments, but this is not the case for the custom one you provide.
> (setq TeX-fold-math-spec-list `((,(lambda (text) (propertize text 'face '(underline))) ("underline"))))
Is there a reason to prefer this vs. the same with
TeX-fold-macro-spec-list in place of TeX-fold-math-spec-list?
Paul
bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2025 08:49:00 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 04 04:49:00 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46941 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1uMjnu-0007uX-DJ
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 04:48:59 -0400
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:60446)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <rahguzar@HIDDEN>)
id 1uMjnq-0007st-Lx
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 04:48:56 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <rahguzar@HIDDEN>)
id 1uMjnk-0006Qx-6y
for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 04:48:48 -0400
Received: from mout-p-101.mailbox.org ([80.241.56.151])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <rahguzar@HIDDEN>)
id 1uMjni-0001kl-4B
for bug-auctex@HIDDEN; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 04:48:47 -0400
Received: from smtp2.mailbox.org (smtp2.mailbox.org [10.196.197.2])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by mout-p-101.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bC1Sx09MGz9sd7;
Wed, 4 Jun 2025 10:48:33 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org;
s=mail20150812; t=1749026913;
h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id:
to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type;
bh=G/mvT4XMsfv0Ays0qYYtXaZV/1aDZIGZVOF/OVgkNns=;
b=OWmgEryPIRAgUo92AtqfvwVTOo4xvquPuQNmzC7McW8BUxJBfhqbveDbnhMsaEgk9TCT5m
ZcW3AxJBQB8A7NSwjRtuHulDirDBRDA1yzMMOFbIorvGarErymQ9+9CzY76uERpo6suK21
+53g2LiiO1XpNZdSJyupBgx8Jl3fXJE8oySTGnwmFnaOc5udarAS+p0EJpo0LyyEmqGNFD
7kI5kvW4cN8iUMdVa9LHWgkUadmZxBOeboTnKe6GRLBO9XoyDtmQlZxpDq+Q1372VewQcS
grg5V+UPtW7buqIgrB38jXVN6ZN+/KKb9XwnQ2CK+UwpfEqVh9Z234m64A9vyg==
From: Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>
To: bug-auctex@HIDDEN
Subject: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:48:28 +0500
Message-ID: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-="
X-MBO-RS-META: ddiz8bzzszs3xzhf3cm84xmtautzfpxz
X-MBO-RS-ID: ce2494cff2d64b24087
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.241.56.151; envelope-from=rahguzar@HIDDEN;
helo=mout-p-101.mailbox.org
X-Spam_score_int: -27
X-Spam_score: -2.8
X-Spam_bar: --
X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001,
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: ultrono@HIDDEN
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: text/plain
Dear AucTeX maintainers,
The commits
d0a57d8d Fix math macro folding to not consume subsequent brackets
33f9eb07 Fix TeX macro end detection in some edge cases
break the folding of math macros with a function spec.
E.g. evaluate
(setq TeX-fold-math-spec-list `((,(lambda (text) (propertize text 'face '(underline))) ("underline"))))
and open the attached file. Do `M-x TeX-fold-mode RET` followed by `M-x
TeX-fold-buffer RET`. This results in
[Error: no content or function found]
getting displayed instead of \underline.
My config has many folding specs which are functions and all of them
exhibit the same behavior.
Reverting the commits above fixes the issue.
Thanks,
Rahguzar
Emacs : GNU Emacs 30.1 (build 1, aarch64-redhat-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 3.24.49, cairo version 1.18.2)
of 2025-04-08
Package: 14.0.9
current state:
==============
(setq
window-system 'pgtk
LaTeX-version "2e"
TeX-style-path '("/home/azeem/.local/state/emacs/auctex/" "/home/azeem/.local/state/emacs/elpaca/builds/auctex/style" "/home/azeem/.local/state/emacs/auctex/auto"
"/home/azeem/.local/state/emacs/auctex/style" "auto" "style")
TeX-auto-save nil
TeX-parse-self nil
TeX-master t
TeX-command-list '(("TeX" "%(PDF)%(tex) %(file-line-error) %`%(extraopts) %S%(PDFout)%(mode)%' %(output-dir) %t" TeX-run-TeX nil (plain-TeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Run plain TeX")
("LaTeX" "%`%l%(mode)%' %T" TeX-run-TeX nil (LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode) :help "Run LaTeX")
("Makeinfo" "makeinfo %(extraopts) %(o-dir) %t" TeX-run-compile nil (Texinfo-mode) :help "Run Makeinfo with Info output")
("Makeinfo HTML" "makeinfo %(extraopts) %(o-dir) --html %t" TeX-run-compile nil (Texinfo-mode) :help "Run Makeinfo with HTML output")
("AmSTeX" "amstex %(PDFout) %`%(extraopts) %S%(mode)%' %(output-dir) %t" TeX-run-TeX nil (AmSTeX-mode) :help "Run AMSTeX")
("ConTeXt" "%(cntxcom) --once %(extraopts) %(execopts)%t" TeX-run-TeX nil (ConTeXt-mode) :help "Run ConTeXt once")
("ConTeXt Full" "%(cntxcom) %(extraopts) %(execopts)%t" TeX-run-TeX nil (ConTeXt-mode) :help "Run ConTeXt until completion")
("BibTeX" "bibtex %(O?aux)" TeX-run-BibTeX nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode ConTeXt-mode) :help "Run BibTeX")
("Biber" "biber %(output-dir) %s" TeX-run-Biber nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Run Biber")
("Texindex" "texindex %s.??" TeX-run-command nil (Texinfo-mode) :help "Run Texindex")
("Texi2dvi" "%(PDF)texi2dvi %t" TeX-run-command nil (Texinfo-mode) :help "Run Texi2dvi or Texi2pdf") ("View" "%V" TeX-run-discard-or-function t t :help "Run Viewer")
("Print" "%p" TeX-run-command t t :help "Print the file") ("Queue" "%q" TeX-run-background nil t :help "View the printer queue" :visible TeX-queue-command)
("File" "%(o?)dvips %d -o %f " TeX-run-dvips t (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Generate PostScript file")
("Dvips" "%(o?)dvips %d -o %f " TeX-run-dvips nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Convert DVI file to PostScript")
("Dvipdfmx" "dvipdfmx -o %(O?pdf) %d" TeX-run-dvipdfmx nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Convert DVI file to PDF with dvipdfmx")
("Ps2pdf" "ps2pdf %f %(O?pdf)" TeX-run-ps2pdf nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Convert PostScript file to PDF")
("LaTeXMk" "latexmk %(latexmk-out) %(file-line-error) %(output-dir) %`%(extraopts) %S%(mode)%' %t" TeX-run-TeX nil (LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode) :help "Run LaTeXMk")
("Glossaries" "makeglossaries %(d-dir) %s" TeX-run-command nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help
"Run makeglossaries to create glossary file")
("Index" "makeindex %(O?idx)" TeX-run-index nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Run makeindex to create index file")
("upMendex" "upmendex %(O?idx)" TeX-run-index t (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Run upmendex to create index file")
("Xindy" "texindy %s" TeX-run-command nil (plain-TeX-mode LaTeX-mode docTeX-mode AmSTeX-mode Texinfo-mode) :help "Run xindy to create index file")
("Check" "lacheck %s" TeX-run-compile nil (LaTeX-mode) :help "Check LaTeX file for correctness")
("ChkTeX" "chktex -v6 %s" TeX-run-compile nil (LaTeX-mode) :help "Check LaTeX file for common mistakes")
("Spell" "(TeX-ispell-document \"\")" TeX-run-function nil t :help "Spell-check the document")
("Clean" "TeX-clean" TeX-run-function nil t :help "Delete generated intermediate files")
("Clean All" "(TeX-clean t)" TeX-run-function nil t :help "Delete generated intermediate and output files") ("Other" "" TeX-run-command t t :help "Run an arbitrary command"))
)
--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/x-tex
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=test.tex
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
XGRvY3VtZW50Y2xhc3N7YXJ0aWNsZX0KClxiZWdpbntkb2N1bWVudH0KJFx1bmRlcmxpbmV7YWJj
fSQKXGVuZHtkb2N1bWVudH0K
--=-=-=--
Rahguzar <rahguzar@HIDDEN>:bug-auctex@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-auctex@HIDDEN:bug#78693; Package auctex.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.