From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id KL76FKecy177GQAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:23:35 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id sM7UEKecy165YQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:23:35 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6DDF9402A2 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:23:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:50504 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdAGb-0002Fx-Gz for larch@yhetil.org; Mon, 25 May 2020 06:23:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51996) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdAGE-0002Du-PC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 25 May 2020 06:23:10 -0400 Received: from relay12.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.232]:46467) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jdAGE-00075K-2F; Mon, 25 May 2020 06:23:10 -0400 Received: from localhost (40-67.ipv4.commingeshautdebit.fr [185.131.40.67]) (Authenticated sender: admin@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay12.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 59153200011; Mon, 25 May 2020 10:23:06 +0000 (UTC) From: Nicolas Goaziou To: TEC Subject: Re: (Feature Request) have org-edit-special work inside non-environment LaTeX blocks, i.e. \( \) and \[ \] References: <87zh9xxrww.fsf@gmail.com> <4274FCF8-5304-4B55-9586-0C718DA388D3@getmailspring.com> <87r1v9ceml.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <871rn8gy40.fsf@gmail.com> <87ftbobbct.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87zh9wfish.fsf@gmail.com> <87y2pgfieh.fsf@gmail.com> <87blmcba2c.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87d06sxqww.fsf@gmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: TEC , Bastien , "emacs-orgmode\@gnu.org" Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 12:23:05 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87d06sxqww.fsf@gmail.com> (TEC's message of "Mon, 25 May 2020 18:09:53 +0800") Message-ID: <87tv049uuu.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.70.178.232; envelope-from=mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr; helo=relay12.mail.gandi.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/05/25 06:09:18 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Bastien , "emacs-orgmode@gnu.org" Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: scn0 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: q6i2Q4AJK1Ku TEC writes: > Just saying 'no' to new lines seems like a possible solution, but long > equations can often be deperate for newlines when it comes to > readability. Saying no to new lines is only necessary in tables. Outside, we only need to say no to blank lines. Note that you cannot preserve newlines in a LaTeX fragment. For example, filling a paragraph containing a LaTeX fragment could modify newlines. >> Some blank lines are meaningful in Org, so removing them could >> change the structure of the input. I wasn't sure it was a good idea >> to do this on user's behalf. > > I see. I'm not quite sure how Org could get inside a LaTeX fragment > though..? I was talking about footnote reference stuff. Perhaps removing silently blank lines, here or in both cases, is better. I have no strong opinion about it.