[TxMt] Latex Config and backward compatibility questions
bmiller at luther.edu
Mon Jul 23 18:54:28 UTC 2007
Thanks for the comments, see below...
Assistant Professor, Computer Science
On 7/23/07, Mike Miller <mightymiller19 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > TM_LATEX_MASTER
> > This one is more interesting. We currently have two ways to
> > specify a master/root file. Using this variable, or using the
> > TexShop %!TEX directive embedded directly in the file. The TexShop
> > way seems clearly superior to me since it allows for more
> > flexibility than a single environment variable per directory or
> > project. So my proposal is that the environment variable goes away.
> I agree that the %!TEX directive allows for more flexibility, but I
> think that there are several reasons that support for the environment
> variable should not be dropped. First, at least in my case, it has
> always sufficed to use the TM_LATEX_MASTER environment variable, and
> I'm not sure that I can imagine a realistic situation in which one
> would need more than one master file per project. Is there a common
> scenario in which one uses several "master" files for the same project?
Here's my scenario in the book I am writing. I have a master file for the
entire book which includes the master files for each chapter. But each
chapter is broken down into individual files for big sections. This
scenario breaks the TM_LATEX_MASTER approach.
Second, if I'm not mistaken, the %!TEX directive must be placed
> manually in every new file that is created in a project; however, if
> one uses the TM_LATEX_MASTER environment variable, a new file in a
> project is automatically assumed to have the same master file as the
> environment variable.
This could be solved by modifying the standard latex templates, or adding
another command to the latex bundle that allows you to quickly add a
directive line to a new file.
Basically, I think that one master file per project makes sense
> because, well, it's a "master" file!
> The dialog looks great, but I do have some questions. How does one
> add a viewer to the list of choices for default viewer?
You would have to modify the nib.
> slightly confused about how the options for opening the viewer
> interact with the error reporting. Do these settings have any effect
> on the error reporting window? If they don't, how will one set what
> is currently known as TM_LATEX_ERRLVL? I think that these settings
> (error reporting and viewer settings) should be independent.
> Personally, I would like to have the viewer always open, but I would
> also like to always be shown the errors/warnings that result from a
The three radio boxes were meant to take the place of the TM_LATEX_ERRLVL
Always open viewer means that the script will always try to open the viewer
regardless of errors or warnings.
Open viewer unless errrors means that the script will open the viewer unless
there are errors
Open manually means you will always have to press the button to open the
If you use an external viewer then the textmate window with any errors or
warnings will always stay around. Just like it does now, or am I missing
something? I may be slightly confused on this based on how I've had my
Do we need a separate checkbox that says keep textmate html window open?
> Mike Miller
> For new threads USE THIS: textmate at lists.macromates.com
> (threading gets destroyed and the universe will collapse if you don't)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the textmate