From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 04 13:40:35 2025 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2025 17:40:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51969 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1uMs6M-0003Vi-Ah for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:40:35 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:55376) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1uMs6I-0003Te-8f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:40:33 -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 ) id 1uMs6B-0003un-0B for bug-auctex@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:40:23 -0400 Received: from mout-p-102.mailbox.org ([80.241.56.152]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_CHACHA20_POLY1305:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uMs69-0003iX-3s for bug-auctex@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 13:40:22 -0400 Received: from smtp202.mailbox.org (smtp202.mailbox.org [10.196.197.202]) (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-102.mailbox.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4bCFGS6bqGz9tq8; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 19:40:16 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailbox.org; s=mail20150812; t=1749058816; 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=SuVfprvY/1rmZhEcxoOMkOHz0aSUC8PGZeWh6PqNF3Q=; b=xA/X2XQQrr/cDR+1+XWP+K5w/FU4SKa6drwA52I5ml2Ld7k0KnNkH6d1SQBvKervnjGB/u bwT5gB4ZD7bfs0iydhx+r3FAEa1QkO+8ER47fWHuNmiuEPcsTj1Fn9eM23qoS/JsRn+gSg jkJoZvCK+YhKLzCW0IqqEWeifLF/5FAJyCZgVLHOyhwF5jWEFJtAvzF1hkT/LM0W4braXz CqgINrOLLsflnQ/GnJhrdpc2xtNJkYcuZW0mn4PD5/+VAQabddNZM6LukuXYy2Ljhu6um/ /QRzVmdPeT99MsFt31ToBLk4gKtl3StNgchK+1xIjS/MHUVxPCeyjEEYNBKjNg== From: Rahguzar To: "Paul D. Nelson" Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: (Paul D. Nelson's message of "Wed, 04 Jun 2025 12:32:08 +0200") References: Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2025 22:40:13 +0500 Message-ID: <87cybjl81u.fsf@mailbox.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-MBO-RS-ID: 116b1b6be952ec9ea1a X-MBO-RS-META: zfhun1u7idddcw441nimrn3t4mpmwntm Received-SPF: pass client-ip=80.241.56.152; envelope-from=rahguzar@mailbox.org; helo=mout-p-102.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: bug-auctex@gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Hi Paul, "Paul D. Nelson" writes: > 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? The reason for why it is in TeX-fold-math-spec-list is that when I started with Emacs I stole it from Tecosaur's config. There are quite a few function specs in my TeX-fold-math-spec-list e.g. for sqrt, frac, mathcal, mathfrak and mathbb etc and most of them are relevant only for math. Should they be moved to TeX-fold-macro-spec-list? > Paul From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 04 19:40:32 2025 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jun 2025 23:40:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54844 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1uMxii-0002Xm-G5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 19:40:32 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:46704) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1uMxig-0002X5-OR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 19:40:31 -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 ) id 1uMxiX-00015a-E2 for bug-auctex@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 19:40:21 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uMxiW-0005x9-0H for bug-auctex@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 19:40:21 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-5533303070cso375014e87.2 for ; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 16:40:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1749080418; x=1749685218; 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=ASfNZ9Etb6VZxpk/+E/TG0xqBGvM8YgwAHN90wBJGDE=; b=IjdVHAZxnCFchnn3qflUZC1BAGybewWDz+qWxPpYVbC0F7P6+k042uioPC/z/+Koi9 vdri04S/GfejEeOnw6VoeQqQRPr6A+vgPMkxmKTKtQ63l9mx0SN4SNKdq2j42hTnuCp6 v7K7YTLFqOpw+sV4T5gLtVCiUSYITZCMdBqekfSNnN/PHf926ZKXEdc1Yz8TYI79UuL2 5LBOH/erVRl7zlH1pkNg/uH/3i7N8pSbzYRI1nwZTb2EI6rM86y4ZyVdmDLeUGFVC0+V MoHYIUGcHI3wPS8y+czoqclzNu3sgAbBRSM0P60IUlf1o5qDN+WyFRN0XRMyPW2wsEAN A1FA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1749080418; x=1749685218; 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=ASfNZ9Etb6VZxpk/+E/TG0xqBGvM8YgwAHN90wBJGDE=; b=Lw+RtzVyf5+mxE5rQg70+DOf9ieRDmFo5vpRYIr9Jz9bfM/N5PqEQzy2JJTpBcRI7W lP7kEqkZ9m7TzKxojCW82T+VI4XBr+0CMK9KxSY2S2moWv6jXmSGVxCQKKbIQIYQtG1w CgnSjckss3sUPQj0UcIz+mw/S00xIuM9cAtS8GAOvgUBbZfX1uAwnn8bmtW5TrdOysk7 b9IsmOorm96BoAya8VTsaq13WShMeMKNLQHhSNjnSd0psnaD3zwYFyqtqMCsnFSAM3Mr aRCgmvb/C3SJ8VB8nkvStcw4HwWznQuZUaXu9b0EoJ6QyJlgU3LgHicc++wPl56XoS6r 6wyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yx/qvDeb6OVkJNH0dK6NMnwqXeZ+dq+HBHGoN/V+M6rsJnQe5mz HuiNf9+tkDGJl0KS0lvO1GlwYmMv/P+cOB/BbEDbu8ooZkHmwNqEuIGpuR50auwK3Fc= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncsSqNUtg+l2b2m+kidpnJx6DFgbsf/z5dqqQFmMijEQRvouVoJ7owB8YcHMo4q Nd1Diavcr/X6R7UqR0Kf0pOoMhhH38jgOGu5yBRoJsbrcEq6bxue2f3dO2i1iIzwUTW9hcokQG4 rpUx0re60wqOo/cWMJ+hFe8KNf8wqwOkFwOCO2jp9MmIx7Sl3H/KsAhDKVq741qoNf0P1jy+CmC rsuigCGdLih860fIK/35hMzRkaNdjwg8PkGZMP2S6Gaicxt+OleN8zT46ElBNdRGMKu5oE9DjLl kpkPrrMnVrQ2C/utbzfTO0tsLvz2gFxl9Lj8aQNAAYAj/HMQL+lIKw95OGT2d6yC+T66A1HJNGN MlwspIw71KKMotWax5J81Tw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGIR+VS4BmOe0Qev3tlrFULLt5u5JTlhhvYXdedvU8IkwSYfRNpxkL5Awh9JipAhBiSBkT7tA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3e06:b0:553:34b7:5731 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-55356adf994mr1492464e87.3.1749080417682; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 16:40:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (static-212-247-159-249.cust.tele2.se. [212.247.159.249]) by smtp.gmail.com with UTF8SMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-553378a156csm2458477e87.69.2025.06.04.16.40.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 04 Jun 2025 16:40:17 -0700 (PDT) From: "Paul D. Nelson" To: Rahguzar Subject: Re: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <87cybjl81u.fsf@mailbox.org> (message from Rahguzar on Wed, 04 Jun 2025 22:40:13 +0500) Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2025 01:40:14 +0200 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::130; envelope-from=ultrono@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x130.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@gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) Hi Rahguzar, >>> (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? > > The reason for why it is in TeX-fold-math-spec-list is that when I > started with Emacs I stole it from Tecosaur's config. There are quite a > few function specs in my TeX-fold-math-spec-list e.g. for sqrt, frac, > mathcal, mathfrak and mathbb etc and most of them are relevant only for > math. Should they be moved to TeX-fold-macro-spec-list? I think one can use TeX-fold-macro-spec-list for all of these. In particular, your underline example works fine there for me. It's not clear to me from those what exactly are the intended purposes of the various spec lists (macro/env/math). My impression from the built-in examples was that the math list is for macros like "alpha" that accept no arguments. The motivation for the offending patch was to make it so folding "\in [0, 1]" doesn't hide the "[0, 1]" as if it were an optional arg. To give a more robust fix that works with your code sample, we would need a more robust way to detect when a macro is not intended to have any (optional) arguments. The implemented approach was to just assume that all the "math" macros accept no arguments. Do you or does anyone have other suggestions? Paul From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jun 11 03:33:16 2025 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jun 2025 07:33:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46098 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1uPFxU-0005ss-F1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 03:33:16 -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 ) 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 ) 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 To: Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX Subject: Re: bug#78693: 14.0.9; Folding of math macros with a function spec is broken In-Reply-To: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@mailbox.org> References: <87bjr3nb8j.fsf@mailbox.org> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 09:32:47 +0200 Message-ID: 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: control Cc: 78693@debbugs.gnu.org, Rahguzar , ultrono@gmail.com X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) forcemerge 78693 78696 78698 thanks Rahguzar via bug-auctex via Bug reporting list for AUCTeX 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