[Vim-latex-devel] Re: compiler rules

[Hermitte L. <her...@fr...>]

* On Sat, Nov 09, 2002 at 12:33:41AM -0800, Srinath Avadhanula <sr...@ee...> wrote:
> > Or may be just check tex-tools.vim + compiler/tex.vim (my variation
> > of a former Srinath's file) + vim-tex.sh I already manage that and
> > much more.
> compiler/tex.vim has changed since then. It no longer requires
> vim-tex.sh because I found out a way to take care of badly nested '('
> in the LaTeX output. 

I've seen that later, but wasn't sure whether the outgoing messages from
LaTeX were still "reformatted". Now I  know, cool!

> This next thing of automatically handling dependencies is a nice
> thing... I will take a look at it. 
>
> But looking at another persons code and then figuring out what part of
> it overlaps with existing portions, extracting the necessary stuff etc
> takes a while. 

I do completly understand what you mean.

> The fastest way by far of getting things into LaTeX-suite will be to
> maybe attach exactly one file which I can directly read in into some
> part of LaTeX-suite.

To use my system, we need:
- change your compiler/tex.vim to expose TeXSetEFM (needed as in the
  compilation chain I use many programs: bibtex, makeindex, latex, ...).
  TCLevel is too highlevel there from what I understood.
- change the name of the options I need into my tex-tool.vim ; and
  eventually, split the file to define the options in texrc.vim. [1]
- rework the way I change the shell I'm using on windows boxes.
- 2 other files dedicated to a portable way of manipulating pathnames
  and dependancies.
- change tex-tools to support makefiles if any
- update the way *tex outgoing messages are managed in tex-tools.

> However, please dont take this to mean that I (or the other developers)
> will never look at the code. 
 dont worry :-))


[1] I'd rather have texrc.vim or .texvimrc instead of just texrc
-- 
Luc Hermitte