>> "Stefan" == Stefan Monnier writes: >> No, I mean the thing that visually replaces α with an actual >> α character (and converts it back when you save). > Did I write the above? Sorry, the first α should have been "\alpha". > And I was just referring to the X-Symbol feature: > AFAIK, one of one of X-Symbol's features is to shows you "nice symbols > and such", such as → ⊢ α, in place of the corresponding TeX code (such > as \to, \vdash, \alpha). It does it in a way which is fairly intrusive, > replacing the \to, \vdash, \alpha text itself in the buffer (and > replacing it back when saving). > And I was pointing out that nowadays it would be a lot more natural to > do that via prettify-symbols-mode which would be more efficient and > wouldn't requiring changing the buffer's content (so, no risk of > messing up the file's content either). You are right, also I find the symbols provided my the functionality you mentioned quite ugly compared to the one presented by x-symbol, a bit like comparing a math documented generated by (La)TeX or say by an IBM from then seventies..... > I know that, but what does it have to do with X-Symbol? When x-symbol was introduced a bit more than 20 years ago it was revolutionary. > More to the point: Emacs's built-in LaTeX mode already displays those > above "_k" and "^l" as sub- and superscripts (and has been doing it for > many years now). > So, what did X-Symbol do with super/subscript that isn't covered by this? Well it does not display the ugly _ (while in x-symbols the _ or ^ are omitted when the indices are displayed)[1] Another important feature, which I have not seen so far by other packages concerns: Graphics! Pdf, jpg gif For example if you have \includegraphics{function.jpg} in your latex file, then x-symbol with represents graphic file inline (in the same buffer) via imagemagick Uwe Footnotes: [1] and the functionality you describe does not work unfortunately in Xemacs, which is irrelevant for this list, but worth to mention.