GNU bug report logs - #70455
[PATCH] Add new user option `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 70455 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 70455 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-auctex <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Add new user option `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:50:24 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

With the new user option disabled (default), behavior is exactly as before:

- When you enter a preview, it is temporarily replaced by a
placeholder icon together with the tex code.
- If you exit the preview without editing, the preview reappears and
the tex code disappears.
- When you edit the tex code, the preview is gone forever.
- When you regenerate a preview, a construction sign briefly appears.

With the new user option disabled, behavior is instead:

- When you enter a preview, it remains visible.  The tex code appears
below the preview.
- When you edit the tex code, the preview does not disappear.  The tex
code persists if you then exit.
- When you regenerate a preview, there is no construction sign, but
instead a direct transition from the old image to the new one.

The advantage is that while editing a formula, you (and anyone else
watching your screen) can continue to look at its rendered form.  If
the user option "preview-protect-point" is active, then a quick "C-c
C-p C-p" or "C-c C-p C-e" will update the rendered form, without
flickering.

I would welcome suggestions for better names than
`preview-leave-open-previews-visible'.

Thanks, best,

Paul

[0001-Allow-opened-previews-to-remain-visible.patch (application/x-patch, attachment)]

Message #8 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>, Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 09:24:17 +0200

Hi Paul,

Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:

> With the new user option disabled (default), behavior is exactly as before:
>
> - When you enter a preview, it is temporarily replaced by a
> placeholder icon together with the tex code.
> - If you exit the preview without editing, the preview reappears and
> the tex code disappears.
> - When you edit the tex code, the preview is gone forever.
> - When you regenerate a preview, a construction sign briefly appears.
>
> With the new user option disabled, behavior is instead:
>
> - When you enter a preview, it remains visible.  The tex code appears
> below the preview.
> - When you edit the tex code, the preview does not disappear.  The tex
> code persists if you then exit.
> - When you regenerate a preview, there is no construction sign, but
> instead a direct transition from the old image to the new one.
>
> The advantage is that while editing a formula, you (and anyone else
> watching your screen) can continue to look at its rendered form.  If
> the user option "preview-protect-point" is active, then a quick "C-c
> C-p C-p" or "C-c C-p C-e" will update the rendered form, without
> flickering.
>
> I would welcome suggestions for better names than
> `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'.
> [...]
>  (defun preview-gs-place (ov snippet box run-buffer tempdir ps-file _imagetype)
>    "Generate an image placeholder rendered over by Ghostscript.
>  This enters OV into all proper queues in order to make it render
> @@ -1231,7 +1238,17 @@ for the file extension."
>    (overlay-put ov 'queued
>                 (vector box nil snippet))
>    (overlay-put ov 'preview-image
> -               (list (preview-icon-copy preview-nonready-icon)))
> +               (let ((default (list (preview-icon-copy preview-nonready-icon))))
> +                 (if preview-leave-open-previews-visible
> +                     (if-let ((ovr (cl-find-if
> +                                    (lambda (ovr)
> +                                      (and
> +                                       (eq (overlay-start ovr) (overlay-start ov))
> +                                       (overlay-get ovr 'preview-image)))
> +                                    (overlays-at (overlay-start ov)))))
> +                         (overlay-get ovr 'preview-image)
> +                       default)
> +                   default)))

I don't have a suggestion for a better name, but another comment.  Your
patch uses `cl-find-if' which is a function.  Until now, we used only
macros from the cl-lib inside AUCTeX in order to have no other runtime
dependencies.  In general, I have no problem if we lift this limitation
and use cl-lib functions as well -- the library is part of Emacs and why
not use it.  But before we do this, I'd like to hear from Keita and
Tassilo what they think about this.

Best, Arash

Message #11 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 11:59:38 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Arash, many thanks for taking a look.  Regarding cl-find-if, I have
no strong feelings, but have attached the modified patch without it in
case that simplifies matters.  Thanks, best,   Paul

[0001-Allow-opened-previews-to-remain-visible.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #14 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>, Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 20:48:56 +0900

Hi Arash and Paul,

>>>>> Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org> writes:
> I don't have a suggestion for a better name, but another comment.  Your
> patch uses `cl-find-if' which is a function.  Until now, we used only
> macros from the cl-lib inside AUCTeX in order to have no other runtime
> dependencies.  In general, I have no problem if we lift this limitation
> and use cl-lib functions as well -- the library is part of Emacs and why
> not use it.  But before we do this, I'd like to hear from Keita and
> Tassilo what they think about this.

I don't mind. It doesn't matter to use emacs built-in library to write
code simply.

I'd like to ask Paul some questions:

> Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:

>> With the new user option disabled, behavior is instead:
>> 
>> - When you enter a preview, it remains visible.  The tex code appears
>> below the preview.

The TeX code appears _to right of_ the preview for inline math
expression for me. Is this a misbehavior? Or does your above sentence
miss this case?

I don't understand the change as a whole, but it seems that this change
extends cases which doesn't touch the preview images through EXCEPTION
argument of `preview-clearout' function. Doesn't this lead to leave some
kind of "debris" which needs additional clean-up facility after usage of
preview-latex?

Regards,
Ikumi Keita
#StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
#Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW

Message #19 received at 70455-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>, 70455-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 13:52:38 +0200

Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:

> Hi Arash, many thanks for taking a look.  Regarding cl-find-if, I have
> no strong feelings, but have attached the modified patch without it in
> case that simplifies matters.

Thanks Paul for your swift response.  I installed that change, along
with a NEWS entry.  Therefore I'm closing this report.

Best, Arash

Message #22 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 13:55:45 +0200

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

>> Your patch uses `cl-find-if' which is a function.  Until now, we used
>> only macros from the cl-lib inside AUCTeX in order to have no other
>> runtime dependencies.  In general, I have no problem if we lift this
>> limitation and use cl-lib functions as well -- the library is part of
>> Emacs and why not use it.  But before we do this, I'd like to hear
>> from Keita and Tassilo what they think about this.
>
> I don't mind. It doesn't matter to use emacs built-in library to write
> code simply.

FWIW, if we go ELPA-releases only and drop standalone tarball releases,
I would suggest we just use

  ;; Package-Requires: ...

in our auctex.el in order to specify the required emacs version,
"cl-lib", and even "compat" and remove all legacy code for emacs
versions older than the last release.

Bye,
Tassilo

Message #25 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 14:25:20 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Keita,

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

> I don't mind. It doesn't matter to use emacs built-in library to write
> code simply.

Thanks for your response.

> I'd like to ask Paul some questions:
>
>> Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>>> With the new user option disabled, behavior is instead:
>>> 
>>> - When you enter a preview, it remains visible.  The tex code appears
>>> below the preview.
>
> The TeX code appears _to right of_ the preview for inline math
> expression for me. Is this a misbehavior? Or does your above sentence
> miss this case?

This is what I see for inline math with the patch installed.  This is
with the new custom option set to nil:

[nil.png (image/png, inline)]

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

And this with t:

[t.png (image/png, inline)]

[Message part 5 (text/plain, inline)]

So basically, the TeX icon was replaced.

Best, Arash

Message #28 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:11:55 +0200

Hi Ikumi,

> >> - When you enter a preview, it remains visible.  The tex code appears
> >> below the preview.
>
> The TeX code appears _to right of_ the preview for inline math
> expression for me. Is this a misbehavior? Or does your above sentence
> miss this case?

You're right, for inlined math, it appears to the right (and for
displayed math, it's like in my summary).  This is the intended
behavior, the idea being that someone watching your screen (in person
or remotely) can stay focused on the equation.

>
> I don't understand the change as a whole, but it seems that this change
> extends cases which doesn't touch the preview images through EXCEPTION
> argument of `preview-clearout' function. Doesn't this lead to leave some
> kind of "debris" which needs additional clean-up facility after usage of
> preview-latex?
>

I think there is no such debris, and have attempted to check this, but
would be happy to learn that I missed something.  The EXCEPTION
argument is used only in preview-place-preview, where it is the
overlay being generated -- not something we want to clearout.  The
changes to preview-place-preview have the effect of keeping the old
overlays around long enough for the call to preview-gs-place (via
preview-call-hook) to be able to use the image from the old overlay in
place of the construction symbol, eliminating the flicker that would
otherwise occur when regenerating a preview.  The subsequent call to
preview-clearout should in fact delete that old image, but it stays in
the cache long enough to serve its fleeting purpose.  Happy to discuss
further if that'd clarify.

Thanks, best,

Paul

Message #31 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 15:12:02 +0200

Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org> writes:

> FWIW, if we go ELPA-releases only and drop standalone tarball releases,
> I would suggest we just use
>
>   ;; Package-Requires: ...
>
> in our auctex.el in order to specify the required emacs version,
> "cl-lib", and even "compat" and remove all legacy code for emacs
> versions older than the last release.

Indeed, that would make a lot of things easier.  So let's wait until
things are working, and then we can decide to go that route 👍

Best, Arash

Message #34 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 00:55:42 +0900

Hi Paul,

>>>>> Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:
> I think there is no such debris, and have attempted to check this, but
> would be happy to learn that I missed something.  The EXCEPTION
> argument is used only in preview-place-preview, where it is the
> overlay being generated -- not something we want to clearout.  The
> changes to preview-place-preview have the effect of keeping the old
> overlays around long enough for the call to preview-gs-place (via
> preview-call-hook) to be able to use the image from the old overlay in
> place of the construction symbol, eliminating the flicker that would
> otherwise occur when regenerating a preview.  The subsequent call to
> preview-clearout should in fact delete that old image, but it stays in
> the cache long enough to serve its fleeting purpose.  Happy to discuss
> further if that'd clarify.

Thanks for clarification. If I understand correctly, "use the image from
the old overlay in place of the construction symbol" means that the user
can't tell whether a particular preview image is to be updated
afterwards or has already been updated, by its appearance only, during
the regeneration process is running. Right? Though I don't object to
that behavior, I think that difference should be mentioned somewhere in
the documentation as a feature (side effect) of non-nil value of the new
customize option.

>> The TeX code appears _to right of_ the preview for inline math
>> expression for me. Is this a misbehavior? Or does your above sentence
>> miss this case?

> You're right, for inlined math, it appears to the right (and for
> displayed math, it's like in my summary).  This is the intended
> behavior, the idea being that someone watching your screen (in person
> or remotely) can stay focused on the equation.

Thanks. Then I'd like to request to update the doc string and
preview-latex.texi accordingly.

To Arash:
It seems that the reason you saw the preview image above the TeX code is
that your inline math is at the beginning of line; in that situation, my
example indeed behaves as you described, too.

Regards,
Ikumi Keita
#StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
#Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW

Message #37 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 18:11:15 +0200

> Thanks for clarification. If I understand correctly, "use the image from
> the old overlay in place of the construction symbol" means that the user
> can't tell whether a particular preview image is to be updated
> afterwards or has already been updated, by its appearance only, during
> the regeneration process is running. Right? Though I don't object to
> that behavior, I think that difference should be mentioned somewhere in
> the documentation as a feature (side effect) of non-nil value of the new
> customize option.

Yes, that's right.  This behavior could just as well be its own
customization option, perhaps "preview-indicate-regeneration"
(default: t), independent of the option
"preview-leave-open-previews-visible" just added; let me know if you'd
prefer that.  I'll also be happy to update the doc/texi if that's what
you intend (presumably by sending a patch on top of the current one,
to this thread?)

Message #40 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2024 21:29:19 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Keita,

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

> To Arash:
> It seems that the reason you saw the preview image above the TeX code is
> that your inline math is at the beginning of line; in that situation, my
> example indeed behaves as you described, too.

Ah, Ok, `bolp' ;-)  This is what I see for inline math within a line for
nil-value

[nil.png (image/png, inline)]

[Message part 3 (text/plain, inline)]

and t:

[t.png (image/png, inline)]

[Message part 5 (text/plain, inline)]

IIUC the TeX icon is again replaced.  This was the thing I looked at.

Best, Arash

Message #43 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 17:56:07 +0900

Hi Paul,

>>>>> Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Yes, that's right.  This behavior could just as well be its own
> customization option, perhaps "preview-indicate-regeneration"
> (default: t), independent of the option
> "preview-leave-open-previews-visible" just added; let me know if you'd
> prefer that.  I'll also be happy to update the doc/texi if that's what
> you intend

I'd like to have updates in the documentation. New customize option is
probably overkilling.

>  (presumably by sending a patch on top of the current one, to this
> thread?)

Yes, please.

Regards,
Ikumi Keita
#StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
#Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW

Message #46 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 11:57:23 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

> I'd like to have updates in the documentation. New customize option is
> probably overkilling.
>
> >  (presumably by sending a patch on top of the current one, to this
> > thread?)
>
> Yes, please.

Please see attached.  Thanks, best,  Paul

[0001-Adjust-docs.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #49 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
To: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:42:42 +0900

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Paul,

>>>>> Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com> writes:
> Please see attached.  Thanks, best,  Paul

Thanks, but it is half of what I wanted :-)

I added a paragraph to your propsal as the attached patch. Can you
confirm it?

Regards,
Ikumi Keita
#StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
#Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW

[0001-Supplement-documentation.patch (text/x-diff, attachment)]

Message #52 received at 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Paul Nelson <ultrono <at> gmail.com>
To: Ikumi Keita <ikumi <at> ikumi.que.jp>
Cc: Arash Esbati <arash <at> gnu.org>, 70455 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Tassilo Horn <tsdh <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#70455: [PATCH] Add new user option
 `preview-leave-open-previews-visible'
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 17:47:35 +0200

Sounds good, thanks!  Paul

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.