From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us>
Subject: Re: [bug?, org-element] latex-environment delimiters must be at BOL
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:49:49 +0200
Message-ID: <87vbqu1xb6.fsf@gmx.us>
References: <877g3ltomt.fsf@gmx.us> <87iomxjvyv.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59672)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rasmus@gmx.us>) id 1X8AQ5-0005Zf-7V
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:50:07 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rasmus@gmx.us>) id 1X8APz-0006r3-68
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:50:01 -0400
Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:50625)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <rasmus@gmx.us>) id 1X8APy-0006qY-T2
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 11:49:55 -0400
Received: from W530 ([46.166.186.234]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA
	(Nemesis) id 0M1n4s-1WFnRU2sCQ-00thdd for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>;
	Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:49:50 +0200
In-Reply-To: <87iomxjvyv.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of
	"Wed, 16 Jul 2014 15:04:40 +0200")
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Hi Nicolas,

Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:

> Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:
>
>> Looking at org-element-latex-environment-parser LaTeX environments are
>> recognized as "[ \t]*\\\\begin{\\([A-Za-z0-9]+\\*?\\)}" (for start)
>> and "^[ \t]*\\\\end{%s}[ \t]*$" (for the end).
>>
>> However, for e.g. small equations one might want to write
>>
>> (*)         \begin{equation} PLACEHOLDER \end{equation},
>>
>> i.e. in one line.  This fails to be recognized as the latter regexp is
>> not satisfied.  For code generated by humans this is not an issue.
>> However, e.g. SymPy generates code in the (*) format.  Prefixing (*)
>> with "#+LATEX:" will prevent ox-html from recognizing it.
>>
>> Should org-element try to catch one-line environments as the one
>> above?  Or is it "a can of worms"?
>
> I think allowing them is possible, as long as \end{equation} ends the
> last line (with trailing whitespaces tolerated).
>
> I assume that, for simplicity, PLACEHOLDER could be longer than one
> line, too.
>
> If Bastien agrees and if you want to provide a patch, please be sure to
> include tests in test-org-element.el, and appropriate changes to "Org
> Syntax" document. The manual may need to be updated, too.

Thanks for your comments.

I changed a couple of things, and org-element now recognizes what I
wanted it to recognize.  Next step: don't break anything.

To test for immediate breakages I do:
   1. Install latest version of org (beta_8.3-15-g224105) on my /usr
      folder and start emacs=C2=A0-q.  Run tests as specified in
      testing/readme.  I get 12 failed (1 unexpected).
   2. Load my modified org-element.el file and rerun tests.
      The only new fail is this one, that is to be expected to fail.

          (should-not
           (eq 'latex-environment
               (org-test-with-temp-text "\\begin{env}{arg} something\nvalue=
\n\\end{env}"
                 (org-element-type (org-element-at-point)))))

Hence, my question is: Can I now assume that my modification are now
somewhat safe wrt. the current Org syntax?

I have a case that I worry a bit about, namely broken LaTeX code with
mismatching no. of begin/end tags:

Consider:

    #+begin_src org=20
      \begin{equation} x^2_3
      \begin{equation} x^2_3 \end{equation}
    #+end_src

With my patch, this will produce (*):

    #+begin_src latex
    \begin{equation} x^2_3
    \begin{equation} x^2_3 \end{equation}
    #+end_src latex

Before it would produce

    #+begin_src latex
    \begin{equation} x\(^{\text{2}}_{\text{3}}\)
    \begin{equation} x\(^{\text{2}}_{\text{3}}\) \end{equation}
    #+end_src latex

Both will break when compiled.  With some more newlines in the
Org-code, I can get this without my patches

   #+begin_src latex
   \begin{equation}=20
    x^2_3
    \begin{equation}=20
    x^2_3
    \end{equation}
    #+end_src latex
=20
which is identical to (*) to a LaTeX compiler.

Should I worry about such changes to behavior?


I will write some tests and review the two documents you mention and
submit a patch ASAP.

Cheers,
Rasmus

--=20
I hear there's rumors on the, uh, Internets. . .