Re: [Vim-latex-devel] Re: [Vim-latex-cvs] A little review...

[Srinath A. <sr...@fa...>]

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Benji Fisher wrote:

>       I think this is going to be helpful in the long run.  In the short
> run, I am afraid that the whle system may be unstable for a while.  I
> would have started a new branch for this.
>
I am sorry I didn't start a branch... This thing just snowballed from
what was supposed to be not too big a change...

>       We should document how the system works.  Parts of your e-mail,
> quoted above, can serve as a draft.  See
>
> :help syntax-loading
>
> for one model.
>
Yup... That looks good...

>       You did not (yet) take my suggestion about packages/german-babel
> and so on.  Is this because you did not like the idea, or just because
> you had a lot of other things on your mind?  Again, the point is that
> packages/german does nothing more than set smart-quote options, but (1)
> this may change and (2) polski already does much more.
>
I just had too many things on my mind... Please go ahead and change
things as needed. Note however that there does need to exist a babel
package because packages/polski is never going to be used if
\usepackage{polski} is not detected. Did you have something else in
mind?

Maybe instead of just defining all these dummy package files, just make
a function Tex_SetLanguageSettings() and an au which calls this on the
LatexSuitePackagesScanned event? Maybe as in vim, put this in a
packages/allpackage.vim file which gets sourced once when latex-suite
starts?

>       If you have already declared
>
> :augroup LatexSuite
>
> then you do not have to include LatexSuite (the augroup) in the :au
> lines.  I find it easier to read without this repetition.  Do you
> disagree, or were you just following the cvs plugin model?
>
I was just following the cvscommand model... The way you suggests looks
better because User is highlighted too...

>       If "ngerman" is given as an option to the babel package, then the
> "german" package will be :source'd.  This will work fine.  Do we want it
> to work this way in general?  I think there are (at least) two versions
> of french; can they also be treated the same way?  I would rather parse
> g:Tex_babel_options and, for each option given (Is it legal to give more
> than one?) :source the appropriate file if it exists.
>
Yes... The present packages/babel is just a prototype for the general
event handling mechanism... I haven't actually invested time in the
actual options setting part of it... I would be glad if someone with
knowledge of the babel package could take over...

>       What is the format of the g:Tex_package_detected and
> g:Tex_{pack}_options variables?  If it is something like "pack1,pack2",
> then it is pretty easy to parse; in particular, your match with
> '\<babel\>' should work reliably.
>
Yes. g:Tex_package_detected is guarenteeed to be of the form
'pack1,pack2' g:Tex_{pack}_options is however just yanked from between
the [ ]'s of the \usepackage[options]{pack}. Since latex is quite a bit
more forgiving about commas, we cannot guarantee a fixed sytnax here.

Srinath