Hi Jim,

Jim <[email protected]> writes:

> OK.  I will add some more comments.  I didn't want to make the
> Changelog message too long, but I will try to provide more detail
> without making it into some sort of "War and Peace" competitor.

Please keep the bug tracker in Cc; I'm re-adding it again.

Thanks, the idea is to have a brief description about the changes; I
think you know where to go 👍

> I did my initial editing of these files in another directory without that
> .dir-locals.el file.  Mea culpa.
>
> I have untabified both tex.el and context.el.

Thanks.

> While on the subject of .dir-locals.el...
> What do you think of the idea of adding some stuff to that file to enforce
> more style conventions there?
>
> I ask because when I am in the git directory, and hit the tab key (which
> for me, anyway, is set to `indent-for-tab-command', it changes the
> indentation of some of the lines in the file which are original (untouched
> by my changes).  For example, should the above have
>         (lisp-body-indent 2)
> ?  (I use 4).

In general, we/I took most of that content from the .dir-locals.el
shipped with Emacs itself.  I just added an entry for `lisp-body-indent'
setting it to 2.

> And there are places where the "then clause" of an "(if" get indented
> differently if I hit tab on those lines.  I don't know if that is me, or
> whether some of the AUCTeX code does not follow "standard, built-in" rules.

You can test the above by starting Emacs with 'emacs -Q' and then giving
it another try.  Otherwise, please show the code and we try to
investigate.  In general, AUCTeX follows the standard, built-in rules,
exceptions are documented in .dir-locals.el in our repo.

> In other words, I am not sure about the indentation and other formatting
> rules expected for AUCTeX elisp code... if there are any more variable
> settings that would enforce the expected settings, in the light of
> different contributors having their own opinions on formatting issues, it
> would probably be helpful.

That is an iterative process, I'm afraid.  As said above, AUCTeX sticks
with standards, and if you get other results, we can adjust our
.dir-locals.el, but we need input from users side what they have changed.

> OK, that would be great.  I'll try to get that patch out in the next
> hour or two.

Great, thanks!

Best, Arash



_______________________________________________
bug-auctex mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-auctex

Reply via email to