Re: The org--math-p advice around texmathp

[Tony Zorman <tony.zorman@tu-dresden.de>]

On Wed, Mar 13 2024 12:58, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> Tony Zorman <tony.zorman@tu-dresden.de> writes:
>
>> I recently stumbled upon the fact that Org has some around advice for
>> texmathp: org--math-p. For reasons that aren't entirely clear to me,
>> this has some special handling for cdlatex-math-symbol, and recognises
>> display and inline maths environments on its own, only calling out to
>> texmathp if it could not find anything. In the former cases, it also
>> populates the texmathp-why variable, although the position is just
>> filled in with 0.
>>
>> I suppose my succinct question is: why? Is there any advantage in
>> handling inline and display maths in this way, only deferring to
>> texmathp as a last resort? I'm asking because I wrote a small package to
>> switch between environments, and the position information that
>> texmathp-why provides is very useful in choosing the closest
>> environment.
>
> Because Org mode syntax is not LaTeX and `texmathp' assumes that we are inside
> LaTeX buffer. So, we first check using Org syntax whether the point is
> inside latex fragment in Org sense.

But isn't what Org calls LaTeX math pretty equivalent to what would
count as the same in a LaTeX buffer? From a quick scan of texmathp.el, I
couldn't actually see a hard-dependency on a TeX-derived mode at all. I
wouldn't really care about this so much, but the fact that the Org
variant just misreports the position is a bit unfortunate, in my
opinion.

  Tony

-- 
Tony Zorman | https://tony-zorman.com/