Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

DO NOT MERGE: Update Julia REPL latex completion for upcoming changes #201

Closed

Conversation

non-Jedi
Copy link
Contributor

@non-Jedi non-Jedi commented Nov 19, 2019

Recently made a PR to julia-mode to use completion-at-point for latex substitution: JuliaEditorSupport/julia-emacs#82. This PR is the changes necessary for compatibility with that new implementation.

I didn't quite grok how jupyter-completion-at-point worked, so there may be details I'm missing, but from what I can tell, it's just duplicating the behavior of julia-latexsub-completion-at-point. Let me know if I'm missing something.

I'm just making this PR now so that I don't forget to do so later since I'm using this branch locally.

I did not update the README which uses jupyter-indent-line as defined for julia as an example because I didn't know what would be a good example to replace it with. There's also the question of whether jupyter-indent-line is worth maintaining since it was only used for julia.

@non-Jedi
Copy link
Contributor Author

non-Jedi commented Nov 19, 2019

I see now that there's logic to complete argument lists and symbols used as dictionary keys, so this PR is incorrect in what it removes. Will update when I get a chance.

EDIT: Done, I think.

@MasonProtter
Copy link

Is this PR finished? If so, you may want to change the title.

@non-Jedi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@MasonProtter No. It's just a preemptive PR for when/if julia-mode is updated with JuliaEditorSupport/julia-emacs#82, and it isn't working correctly anyways.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants