Closed apresta closed 1 year ago
That's a better alternative than #72. However, it requires some documentation, and a default (initial) value.
I retracted (closed) #72.
Thanks !
@EmmanuelCharpentier sounds good, thanks. Can you please clarify what needs documenting and an initial value?
Can you please clarify what needs documenting and an initial value?
HTH,
This PR doesn't introduce any new variable, it actually deletes sage-shell-view-latex-math-environment
which is no longer needed.
This PR doesn't introduce any new variable, it actually deletes
sage-shell-view-latex-math-environment
which is no longer needed.
Wups ! I reverse-read your patch....
Deepest apologies !
No problem!
Thanks a lot for this work ! Any show stopper merging this one ? Having to type "view(...)" each time and switching to my browser seriously disrupt my workflow.
@EmmanuelCharpentier - I've promoted you to a maintainer of this repo, you can merge things now.
@hivert - I can promote you to maintainer of this repo too - would you like to be one?
@hivert - I can promote you to maintainer of this repo too - would you like to be one?
First of all, thank for the proposition !
If I'd definitely like to help, I'm still at the script-kiddie level concerning emacs internals and lisp programming. I don't think I'm knowledgeable enough for the task. Sorry...
@hivert - well, I suppose you can test things, and that's good enough. Of course I can merge this without looking (I haven't been using emacs for 20 years), but that's not as good.
@EmmanuelCharpentier - I've promoted you to a maintainer of this repo, you can merge things now.
Thanks ! I'll do that (I've reviewed this patch already, and I'm using it currently).
I just accepted the merge. It should appear on Melpa in a not too long time. Bug me if that doesn't happen.
Well...
whereas my local branch does. I'll investigate.
Could you please review this pull request which reintegrates @apresta 's fix, which somehow disappeared from the previous pull request I merged (after successfully reviewing its branch) ?
Thanks again...
This fixes issue #61. Adapted from PR #70 with @aikrahguzar's help.