#1648 cite autocomplete entries missing

[Anonymous]

In the last week my autocomplete for my citations stopped.
\ref still works for me.
What I tried:

• adding bibtex to autocomplete in the options
• added the folder containing the bibtex file (additional files)
• Idefix--> Reconstruct structure.

My current autocomplete looks like this

It just show \cite{bibid}

[Jan Sundermeyer]

image seems to be missing
txs needs to know where the bibliography is, probably the \bibliography{filename} is missing or put in a subdocument which not loaded. (or the filename uses other unexpected paths)
by the way, there is usually no need to change the autocomplete options as txs automatically detectes \usepackage commands.

[Sebastian Penhouet]

Eventually this is the same problem as:
http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/288193/why-doesnt-texstudio-suggest-any-bib-items-for-citation?noredirect=1#comment699108_288193

[Tim Hoffmann]

Please provide a minimal example so that we can reproduce it here.

[Sebastian Penhouet]

I can provide a minimal example for my problem, not the ops problem.

The problem seems to be when the options of biblatex are written in multiple lines. For example:

\usepackage[
    backend=biber
    ]{biblatex}

In the template i use, the options are written as followed:

\usepackage[
    backend=biber, 
    bibwarn=true, 
    bibencoding=utf8, 
    sortlocale=de_DE, 
    style=alphabetic
    ]{biblatex}

If i delete all line breaks, TeXstudio does recognize the bib file.

Minimal example:

document.tex:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[
    backend=biber
    ]{biblatex}
\addbibresource{bibliographie.bib}
\begin{document}
\cite{Anderson.2012}
\end{document}

bibliographie.bib:

@book{Anderson.2012,
 author = {Anderson, David J. and Roock, Arne and Wolf, Henning},
 year = {2012},
 title = {Kanban: Evolution{\"a}res Change Management f{\"u}r IT-Organisationen},
 price = {EUR 34.90 (DE), EUR 35.90 (AT), sfr 49.90 (freier Pr.)},
 keywords = {Kanban;Kanban-System},
 address = {Heidelberg},
 edition = {Dt. Ausg. der 1. amerikan. Aufl., 1. korr. Nachdr},
 publisher = {dpunkt-Verl.},
 isbn = {9783898647304  [Titel anhand dieser ISBN in Citavi-Projekt übernehmen] },
 series = {it-agile}
}

[Jan Sundermeyer]

for starters, txs does not (yet) support several multiline arguments.

\usepackage[
backend=biber
]{biblatex}

is not recognized as \usepackage{biblatex}, hence the addlib-command is ignored

Avoid the use of multiline arguments ( \usepackage[backend=biber]{biblatex} worsk fine)
or activate biblatex.cwl in options/completion

[Sebastian Penhouet]

Since multiline arguments are working in TexMaker and TeXstudio claims to be a fork from TexMaker and also multiline arguments are just a basic function i see this as a bug and not as a feature.

I'm using multiline arguments everywhere... just because it's totally normal.
So for starters, it would be very good to fix that bug in TeXstudio or add this missing basic funtionality.

[Tim Hoffmann]

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of a fork

In software engineering, a project fork happens when developers take a copy of source code from one software package and start independent development on it, creating a distinct and separate piece of software.

There's no connection between TXS and Texmaker, except that TXS still contains some of the Texmaker code from 2009.

Apart from that, I don't think that "multiline arguments are working in TexMaker". Texmaker just does not interpret them. In particular for \usepackage it statically assumes that \addbibresource is a known command which indicates a bib file. As explained by Jan, you can achieve the same effect in TXS by statically activating biblatex.cwl in options/completion.

Now, disregarding Texmaker, the request for multiline arguments has been discussed and is a known limitation in TXS:
https://sourceforge.net/p/texstudio/bugs/809/
https://sourceforge.net/p/texstudio/feature-requests/549/

There's been already some internal progress in that direction, but as trivial as it might seem from the outside, it requires substantial changes of the internal structure. This is a long term project!

[Sebastian Penhouet]

As software developer i do know the concept of a fork and i do know that it's possible to keep the fork up to date. But you are right, i didn't know that TeXstudio is a separate project since 2009. I did switch to TeXstudio because colleagues told me that TeXstudio is on the same level as TexMaker but only advanced.

I also didn't know the specifics how this does work in TexMaker.
All that does sound reasonable. Thanks for the kind reply and the provided information Tim. Had a bad day yesterday, sorry for my stroppy message.

I would also be intressted in the feature request that your parser can read multilines.
But i see that the last feature request (549) is older than 2 years, so i don't have much hope that this will get implemented.
The feature request 549 is not really clear about this problem (multiline parsing), should i submit a new feature request?

[Tim Hoffmann]

But i see that the last feature request (549) is older than 2 years, so i don't have much hope that this will get implemented.
The feature request 549 is not really clear about this problem (multiline parsing), should i submit a new feature request?

I don't think that it would make a difference. We are well aware of the situation. For example, most highlighting is purely regexp matching on a per-line basis. The semantic interpretation of the commands (and some more complicated context-dependent highlighting) is done by a different parser. Originally that was line-based as well, but Jan has recently made a significant effort and rewritten it completely to be more powerful and less line-dependent at the same time. So, while it may not be obvious, some things are going on here. That said, it's still along term project.

[Sebastian Penhouet]

Okay :) Good to hear.

[Jan Sundermeyer]

you got to be kidding me