vim-latex-devel

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

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

Hello Artem,

I am forwarding this to the vim-latex-devel group also because it is of
interest.

On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, Artem Chuprina wrote:

> SA> i found out that the %f flag actually looks for a valid file, i.e if its
> SA> not readable then it doesnt match. therefore the 'haha' thingie broke
> SA> the parsing. however, sometimes things like this do happen in actual
> SA> compilation:
>
> SA> [10] (file1 (badness 1000) file3 (
>
> For badness such a message is impossible, because it is always a part of
> underfull warning message. But I tried to fit other such possibilities
> (actually unknown for me). Diff is attached. I'll send it to Bram after a
> little more testing, so I'll thank you if you test this patch too and send me
> a bugreport if you find bugs.
>
> SA> where the badness warnings occur because of improber \hbox placements.
> SA> the following simple thing therefore seems to work around the problem:
>
> SA> > 1   \%+O(%f)%r,
>
> SA> %O(%*[^()])%r
>
> as is this does not help, because in this situation it was not this O who eats
> closing parenthesis (line does not begin with opening parenthesis, so O does
> not match). See the diff.
>
Thanks! I will test this.

> SA> also, another thing which you might want to do in your makeprg setting
> SA> is the following:
>
> SA> if has('win32')
> SA> 	set &makeprg = 'latex -interaction=nonstopmode $*'
> SA> endif
>
> SA> this is how miktex likes it.
>
> Well, I discovered that teTeX likes this too, so I changed makeprg to this
> version.
>
This might be of quite a bit of interest to the vim-latex-devel people.
Benji was concerned that the -interaction=nonstopmode (I thought it was
--interaction but it looks like -interaction works too for miktex) will
break tex compilers and that the \\nonstopmode is a better alternative.
If it is true that most if not all latex compilers can handle
-interaction style syntax, it will take care of the old backslash
escaping problem once and for all..

> SA> yet another thingie which broke when i used it with bash/cygwin is that
> SA> external programs get executed as following:
>
> SA>   !bash -c "latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}"
>
> why not
>
> !bash -c 'latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}'
>

Yes... I guess I could have changed the value of shellquote. Vim guesses
'shellquote' to be " when I do :set shell=bash in my .vimrc...

Srinath

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

[Benji F. <be...@me...>]

Srinath Avadhanula wrote:
> Hello Artem,
> 
>>SA> also, another thing which you might want to do in your makeprg setting
>>SA> is the following:
>>
>>SA> if has('win32')
>>SA> 	set &makeprg = 'latex -interaction=nonstopmode $*'
>>SA> endif
>>
>>SA> this is how miktex likes it.
>>
>>Well, I discovered that teTeX likes this too, so I changed makeprg to this
>>version.
>>
> 
> This might be of quite a bit of interest to the vim-latex-devel people.
> Benji was concerned that the -interaction=nonstopmode (I thought it was
> --interaction but it looks like -interaction works too for miktex) will
> break tex compilers and that the \\nonstopmode is a better alternative.
> If it is true that most if not all latex compilers can handle
> -interaction style syntax, it will take care of the old backslash
> escaping problem once and for all..

      Just yesterday, I updated teTeX on my Linux system, with the 
latest RPM's from Red Hat, and now tex understands the -interaction 
option.  I still think that a lot of people are using older 
distributions of tex.  It has been a long time since there was an 
official release of teTeX.  True, a lot of people have switched to the 
beta version, which supportsd this option; in fact, I am not sure which 
version is in the RPM I downloaded.  If this is the only place where 
escaping backslashes is an issue, and that is still causing problems, 
then it is a judgment call.

      For someone using an old version of tex, how hard will it be to 
fix the problem if the default is changed?

>>SA> yet another thingie which broke when i used it with bash/cygwin is that
>>SA> external programs get executed as following:
>>
>>SA>   !bash -c "latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}"
>>
>>why not
>>
>>!bash -c 'latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}'
> 
> Yes... I guess I could have changed the value of shellquote. Vim guesses
> 'shellquote' to be " when I do :set shell=bash in my .vimrc...
> 
> Srinath

      Is there any way to guess which is more common:  ancient versions 
of tex or cygwin installations?

					--Benji

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

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

On 2003.01.20 at 09:01:56 -0500, Benji Fisher wrote:

> >>SA> also, another thing which you might want to do in your makeprg setting
> >>SA> is the following:
> >>
> >>SA> if has('win32')
> >>SA> 	set &makeprg = 'latex -interaction=nonstopmode $*'
> >>SA> endif
> >>
> >>SA> this is how miktex likes it.
> >>
> >>Well, I discovered that teTeX likes this too, so I changed makeprg to this
> >>version.
> >>
> >
> >This might be of quite a bit of interest to the vim-latex-devel people.
> >Benji was concerned that the -interaction=nonstopmode (I thought it was
> >--interaction but it looks like -interaction works too for miktex) will
> >break tex compilers and that the \\nonstopmode is a better alternative.
> >If it is true that most if not all latex compilers can handle
> >-interaction style syntax, it will take care of the old backslash
> >escaping problem once and for all..
> 
>      Just yesterday, I updated teTeX on my Linux system, with the 
> latest RPM's from Red Hat, and now tex understands the -interaction 
> option.  I still think that a lot of people are using older 
> distributions of tex.  It has been a long time since there was an 
> official release of teTeX.  True, a lot of people have switched to the 
> beta version, which supportsd this option; in fact, I am not sure which 
> version is in the RPM I downloaded.  If this is the only place where 
> escaping backslashes is an issue, and that is still causing problems, 
> then it is a judgment call.
> 
>      For someone using an old version of tex, how hard will it be to 
> fix the problem if the default is changed?

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.

> >>SA> yet another thingie which broke when i used it with bash/cygwin is 
> >>that
> >>SA> external programs get executed as following:
> >>
> >>SA>   !bash -c "latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}"
> >>
> >>why not
> >>
> >>!bash -c 'latex \\nonstopmode \\input\{thesis.tex\}'
> >
> >Yes... I guess I could have changed the value of shellquote. Vim guesses
> >'shellquote' to be " when I do :set shell=bash in my .vimrc...
> >
> >Srinath
> 
>      Is there any way to guess which is more common:  ancient versions 
> of tex or cygwin installations?

Both are rare. Ancient TeX with vim 6.1 seems to be more rare.

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

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

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

Hello,

On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Artem Chuprina wrote:

> >      Just yesterday, I updated teTeX on my Linux system, with the
> > latest RPM's from Red Hat, and now tex understands the -interaction
> > option.  I still think that a lot of people are using older
> > distributions of tex.  It has been a long time since there was an
> > official release of teTeX.  True, a lot of people have switched to the
> > beta version, which supportsd this option; in fact, I am not sure which
> > version is in the RPM I downloaded.  If this is the only place where
> > escaping backslashes is an issue, and that is still causing problems,
> > then it is a judgment call.
> >
> >      For someone using an old version of tex, how hard will it be to
> > fix the problem if the default is changed?
>
> 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...

As far as escape backslashing goes, although the compiler in latex-suite
tries to do a fair bit of guessing, it still fails in the situation
where cygwin is used in a win32 environment.

You can see the latest compiler/tex.vim for latex-suite at:

http://cvs.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/vim-latex/vimfiles/compiler/tex.vim

And how to hack around the second issue at:

http://vim-latex.sourceforge.net/index.php?subject=faq#faq-2

I think that we could have improved the guesswork if we had somehow
detected whether 'shellquote' was " or '

What happens in win32 is:

- if &shell='' then cmd.exe is used and things should be called like:

    cmd.exe /c latex \nonstopmode \input{$*}

  This is because cmd.exe doesn't see \ as an escape character and it is
  passed verbatim to latex.

- if &shell=bash, then vim guesses &shellquote = '"', so that things
  need to be called like:

    bash -c "latex \\\\nonstopmode \\\\input\\{$*\\}

  Somehow there are 2 levels of escaping before this finally gets to
  latex. I know that bash will do one level. I do not know what does the
  second... (is it vim itself?)

So just to be complete, I think we'll need to also check for &shellquote
in addition to &shell. See
    :help dos-shell
for all the gory details. I might spend a little more time on this next
time I get a chance.

Ofcourse, if we just use the --interaction sytnax, we instantly take
care of all these problems. Also, in the standard compiler/tex.vim it
might be a good idea to provide an option to let the use specify the
complete command line for calling the compiler.

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

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.

Srinath

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