[QUERY] Anyone using multiple org-preview-latex-process-alist commands?

[QUERY] Anyone using multiple org-preview-latex-process-alist commands?

[Timothy]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 712 bytes --]

Hi All,

In my rewrite of the LaTeX preview system, I’m finding it a bit annoying dealing
with the potential of multiple commands being used in the
`org-preview-latex-process-alist'’s
`:latex-compiler'/`:latex-precompiler'/`:image-converter' properties.

I’m hence considering adding support for a string value, and deprecating support
for multiple-command lists.

Does anybody actually use multiple commands? If so, for what purpose?

All the best,
Timothy

-- 
Timothy (‘tecosaur’/‘TEC’), Org mode contributor.
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/tec>.

Re: [QUERY] Anyone using multiple org-preview-latex-process-alist commands?

[Fraga, Eric]

On Tuesday, 10 Jan 2023 at 16:15, Timothy wrote:
> Does anybody actually use multiple commands? If so, for what purpose?

If it helps, I didn't even know this variable existed.

However, implicitly, I guess I've used it in that I specific one of the
three methods in my documents, sometimes switching between alternatives
depending on the type of LaTeX snippets I have in my document and how I
am going to use the exported version.  I guess you will still enable
alternative methods for image generation?

-- 
: Eric S Fraga, with org release_9.6-201-gb58fba in Emacs 30.0.50

Re: [QUERY] Anyone using multiple org-preview-latex-process-alist commands?

[Nick Dokos]

Timothy <orgmode@tec.tecosaur.net> writes:

> Hi All,
>
> In my rewrite of the LaTeX preview system, I’m finding it a bit
> annoying dealing with the potential of multiple commands being used
> in the `org-preview-latex-process-alist'’s
> `:latex-compiler'/`:latex-precompiler'/`:image-converter'
> properties.
>
> I’m hence considering adding support for a string value, and
> deprecating support for multiple-command lists.
>
> Does anybody actually use multiple commands? If so, for what purpose?
>

I have entries for `dvipng', `dvisvgm' and `imagemagick' in that
variable (with different values for the various processors). I use
mostly imagemagick for my purposes, but I've used the other two
occasionally when I had to debug other people's setups.

I find the setup flexible and easy to deal with: what do you find
annoying about it?

-- 
Nick

Re: [QUERY] Anyone using multiple org-preview-latex-process-alist commands?

[Nick Dokos]

Timothy <orgmode@tec.tecosaur.net> writes:

> Hi All,
>
> In my rewrite of the LaTeX preview system, I’m finding it a bit
> annoying dealing with the potential of multiple commands being used
> in the `org-preview-latex-process-alist'’s
> `:latex-compiler'/`:latex-precompiler'/`:image-converter'
> properties.
>
> I’m hence considering adding support for a string value, and
> deprecating support for multiple-command lists.
>
> Does anybody actually use multiple commands? If so, for what
> purpose?
>

I guess I misunderstood you: you are objecting to e.g. the
:latex-compiler value being a list, rather than a single string.

I think that was modeled after `org-latex-pdf-process' which is a list
of commands because LaTeX needed to be run multiple times in various
cases, so originally, this was a list of three invocations of LaTeX
("what I tell you three times is true"). With `latexmk' and similar,
that has thankfully become a thing of the past, so a single command is
enough, but making it not a list is probably going to break backward
compatibility.

OTOH, although I seem to have modified some details of
`org-preview-latex-process-alist', I have not added multiple commands
for any of the above. But it's conceivable that someone has - although
it's probably less likely than with `org-latex-pdf-process' - so you
may hear complaints in some distant future about it :-) 

So assuming that I've understood you correctly this time, I have no
objection to simplifying (at least, I cannot think of any ATM).

-- 
Nick