Hi Gustavo,

>>>>> Gustavo Barros <gusbrs.2016@gmail.com> writes:
> Also, I respectfully disagree with the assessment that "it doesn't
> actually harm users". Indeed, `reftex-citation' is very convenient,
> and also my favorite, but it is not a full replacement for
> `TeX-insert-macro' for citation commands. `biblatex' has over 50
> citation commands, and `reftex-citation's dispatcher would become
> impractical if we actually tried to have them all available there. It
> is great for our most used ones, but for those odd birds, we still
> need `TeX-insert-macro'.

Hmm. I know almost nothing about biblatex, so I didn't know that.
Thanks.

> Regarding what to do, I see two ways to handle it. Either make
> "q"/"C-g" not delete the citation when leaving, or simply not loop,
> handling just the first bibkey. Perhaps there's good reason why
> "q"/"C-g" reverts the whole operation. But it cannot be too difficult
> simply not to loop at `LaTeX-arg-biblatex-cites'. And that is actually
> how `reftex-citation' works for citation lists, it only inserts the
> first argument.

Thank you for suggestion. Does the attached patch give you good results?

(By the way, the reason that "q"/"C-g" deletes the trace of the previous
input is that `TeX-insert-macro' introduced `atomic-change-group' a year
ago[1].)

[1] Thread beginning with
https://lists.gnu.org/r/auctex-devel/2022-08/msg00057.html

Regards,
Ikumi Keita
#StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine