Subject: Re: bug#58005: 13.1.4; Can't work with indirect buffers

From: Vangelis Evangelou <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:59:03 +0100

Hi all.

I'm not sure what the ideal outcome is. It depends on each user's case. In
principle, indirect buffers have identical text content as their base
buffer, but different view properties, so the previews not showing in the
indirect buffer agrees with this principle. I therefore, agree with Paul's
comment.

On your comment:

> In theory, base buffer and cloned buffer can have different master file as
> you say and the user can make use of that duality. However, the user must
> remember which buffer has which master file in that case, between buffers
> with identical contents. That doesn't seem a useful feature to me.

This can be achieved by renaming the buffer accordingly, for example
file.tex<foo> has master foo.tex and file.tex<bar> has master bar.

Best,
Vangelis

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 at 06:27, Ikumi Keita <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Hi Paul and Vangelis,
>
> >>>>> Paul Nelson <[email-masked]> writes:
> >> Ah, I see. Thanks for confirmation. I didn't try region preview. The
> >> previews do appear in the indirect buffer if I type C-c C-p C-b etc.
> >>
> >> I expect you see what I described if you type C-c C-p C-d in the
> >> indirect buffer.
>
> > OK, good -- we're on the same page then.
>
> > For whatever it's worth, in my opinion, this is the correct behavior:
> > preview-document should not be responsible for indirect buffers, a bit
> > like how it is not responsible for buffers having the given TeX-master
> > that do not appear \include'd in that TeX-master's source.
>
> OK. Vangelis, what do you think about it? The same opinion?
>
> Regards,
> Ikumi Keita
> #StandWithUkraine #StopWarInUkraine
> #Gaza #StopMassiveKilling #CeasefireNOW
>