Re: Re: Fail to compile a file's LaTeX export

[Tim Burt <tcburt@rochester.rr.com>]

David Maus writes:
 > Leo wrote:
 > >On 2010-03-20 20:29 +0000, Leo wrote:
 > >> Hello,
 > >>
 > >> While taking some common lisp notes, I found compiling the following org
 > >> file's LaTeX output fails.
 > >>
 > >> --------------------------------
 > >> #+title: test file
 > >>
 > >> * one
 > >>   1. (char "string" 2) => #\r
 > >>   2. define-modify-macro
 > >>   3. (code-char 66) => #\B and (char-code #\B) => 66
 > >>   4. terpri and fresh-line
 > >>   5. "~n&" print a new line if not at the beginning of a line and then n-1 new lines.
 > >> --------------------------------
 > >>
 > >> Leo
 > 
 > >BTW, this was tested with the devel version of org.
 > 
 > Can confirm this for
 > 
 > Org-mode version 6.34trans (release_6.34c.225.g1576)
 > 
 > on
 > 
 > GNU Emacs 24.0.50.1 (i486-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version 2.18.7) of
 >  2010-03-11 on elegiac, modified by Debian
 > 
 > Exporting to LaTeX works fine but compiling the LaTeX file errors out
 > with:
 > 
 > ,----
 > | ERROR: LaTeX Error: Something's wrong--perhaps a missing \item.
 > |
 > | --- TeX said ---
 > |
 > | See the LaTeX manual or LaTeX Companion for explanation.
 > | Type  H <return>  for immediate help.
 > |  ...
 > |
 > | l.37 \item
 > |            define-modify-macro
 > | --- HELP ---
 > | The most probable cause is an omitted \item command in a list-making
 > | environment. It is also caused by forgetting the argument of a
 > | thebibliography environment.
 > `----
 > 
 > Where the LaTeX code for the enumerate environment reads:
 > 
 > ,----
 > | \begin{enumerate}
 > | \item (char ``string'' 2) => \#\r
 > | \item define-modify-macro
 > | \item (code-char 66) => \#\B and (char-code \#\B) => 66
 > | \item terpri and fresh-line
 > | \item ``\~{}n\&'' print a new line if not at the beginning of a line and then n-1 new lines.
 > | \end{enumerate}
 > `----
 > 
 > I suppose the \#\r is the problematic piece, will look into it
 > tomorow.


Indeed \r is one of the problematic pieces; the other is the \B.  The
LaTeX exporter does not modify them since they look like LaTeX
commands already, which is true in the case of \r (see below) but not
in that for \B.  Either way I don't get the impression that either is
intended to be used as a LaTeX command so they should be marked
somehow for conversion, but I don't know what would be most
satisfactory.



The \r is a LaTeX command that puts a ring accent over the next
character.  For example, \r{A} looks somewhat like the Angstrom unit.
My fractured fairy tale is that the generated LaTeX code breaks
because the character following \r is not one that can be accented in
a way that keeps the lists (especially the \item command) sane.

Tim