Subject: bug#61410: texmathp and literal $

From: Arash Esbati <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2023 12:27:13 +0100

Hi Keita,

Ikumi Keita <[email-masked]> writes:

> Yes. As far as I can see, texmathp.el doesn't pay attention to verbatim
> constructs at all. I think that's an intention of Carsten Dominik.

Thanks for confirming.  I'm not sure about the intention behind it, but
I think we should if we can fix this issue.

> Maybe we can make texmathp syntax-aware (that is, to look into "string
> quotes" syntax.) Currently, I'm not sure whether that's easy or not.

My simple idea was to have an extra check at the end of `texmathp'
itself in terms of: Pass the possible point for math-on to
`LaTeX-verbatim-p' and see what it returs.  I think the possibility for

  $ a \verb|$| $  <= invoke texmathp here

is next to zero while this

  $ a $ \verb|$| <= invoke texmathp here

or this

  \begin{verbatim}
  $
  \begin{end}
  <= invoke texmathp here

are not so far away, from user POV.

> Do you think it's important to have this feature? (I'm neutral to the
> importance.)

I'd say yes: Imagine you want to write a trivial example of bash command
in your document:

  \begin{verbatim}
  $ touch foo
  \begin{end}

currently breaks.

Best, Arash