Re: port x-symbol to GNU emacs 24.

>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <[email protected]> writes:

   > Uwe Brauer <[email protected]> writes:
   >> > What features are those you don't see elsewhere in Emacs?  (I'm
   >> > specifically asking about GNU Emacs, not XEmacs.)
   >> 
   >> I think a picture says more than 1000 words, here is a screenshot. (I
   >> hope it will not be blocked).

   > Actually, it doesn't.  This screenshot is not dissimilar what you'll get
   > from using AUCTeX, preview-latex and TeX-fold-mode.

Well, preview-latex is actually better concerning math formula. It is
equivalent for the included graphics as far GNU emacs is concerned but
preview-latex is inferior concerning the graphics in Xemacs, don't know
why.


However the disadvantage of approach used by preview-latex is that you
have run latex on the document/buffer, while for x-symbol you don't. If
you modify a formula using preview-latex you have at least rerun the
environment, while again in x-symbol you don't have to. Of course
x-symbol is not very helpful if the formula contains fractions or
matrices etc. In short both packages serve different purposes.

   > The main "not elsewhere" category I see are XEmacs' extensive input
   > modes (grid which is sort of a buffer-based menu, keyboard input methods
   > quite better sorted and convenient than what Quail offers and with
   > better feedback).

But this feature I use rather seldom, since I am very much used to cdlatex.

   > Its buffer reencoding is a rather mixed blessing, but
   > it works with more than just TeX modes.

Well sometimes I actually hate the reencoding, but on the other hand I
usually receive a lot of latex documents in spanish with a mixture of
coding, utf8 latin-1 or TeX constructs such as 'a \'a {\' a} etc etc.
X-symbol deals with them in rather coherent way.