Re: [Vim-latex-devel] Re: Your compiler/tex.vim plugin

[Artem C. <ra...@ra...>]

On 2003.01.20 at 10:35:49 -0800, Srinath Avadhanula wrote:

> > I hope that this compiler was in vim not so much time that this is an issue.
> > But I know many people who use old emTeX under Win32. So I am going to support
> > \nonstopmode as a fallback for them, but I need to resolve backslash escaping
> > issues.
> >
> Hmm... If you are going to have to support escape backslashing, then you
> might as well support only that since all compilers accept that syntax
> as best as I know...

First, I cannot guarantee that I'll succeed in this backslash escaping.
Second, backslash syntax prevents from specifying any other options for TeX
through :make while commandline syntax allows.
Maybe "second" is indeed "first".
So I am going to fallback to this syntax (by user's variable setting) on his
own risk, not as a reliable solution.

[skip!]

I'll read the skipped carefully but not at late night...

> > Both are rare. Ancient TeX with vim 6.1 seems to be more rare.
> >
> I do not think cygwin is too rare. If its not cygwin, then its some
> other winutils kind of a shell...

But does it is the UNIX-like or Windows native shell that is the specified (or
unspecified :-)) in user's Vim configuration? Moreover, I think that UNIX-like
utilities on Windows is even more marginal than UNIX itself. But I do not
think that they are ignorably rare, because _I_ use them when I need to work
with Windows :-)

> On windows cygwin provides a great
> terminal and all the familiar unix tools.

Yes... If it could also support Russian well enough...

> Artem:
> You are welcome to join the mailing list:
>     http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/vim-latex-devel
> If you wish, take a look at the archives to get an idea of the activity
> level.

Thank you.

-- 
Sorry for my English,
Artem Chuprina (Ran)
RFC2822: <ra...@ra...>, FIDO: 2:5020/358.49