T. Verron

Age: 23

8h
awarded Teacher
11h
reviewed Close Disable indentation within a section
23h
comment organize the content of ~/.emacs.d/init.el and ~/emacs.d?
(Cannot edit anymore) What I wrote above is not rigorously true: elpa is the format of the package archives, package.el is the package manager. For the user, there is no real difference between the two. My comment above mistakes elpa with GNU elpa, which is one of the available elpa packages (and the only official one).
1d
comment organize the content of ~/.emacs.d/init.el and ~/emacs.d?
@Tim: The directory managed by package.el is elpa. Elpa is not a lisp package, it's a package repository. Package.el will still add all packages it installs (be it from elpa or from another repository --- for example in your case, I don't think eclim and s are from elpa) in the directory elpa. And yes, you shouldn't need to worry about the content of this directory.
1d
awarded Explainer
1d
comment Persistent environment for M-x compile
The easiest and dirtiest way to send a command to a comint buffer is to insert it into the buffer and call comint-send-input. That's basically what you are doing by hand, converting it to elisp shouldn't be very hard (especially compared to setting up the comint).
1d
reviewed Reject suggested edit on Passing listing-environment as option to command
1d
reviewed Close How can I decrease the indent of itemize inside a column in Beamer
1d
reviewed Looks Good bigfoot with "para" option cannot count footnotes perpage
1d
awarded Scholar
1d
accepted "Deviates from the original intent"?
1d
reviewed Reviewed Undefined control sequence for $ \left\{ f\in \mathbb{R} :f\neq 0\right\}$
1d
comment Undefined control sequence for $ \left\{ f\in \mathbb{R} :f\neq 0\right\}$
While code snippets are useful, you should always try to include a Minimal Working Example (MWE), that is a compilable document showing the problem. In this case, your problem is likely to come from a package missing from your preamble, so it would be immediately useful.
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
Since the question got an answer (about hg) by now, I guess it is harmless to let it go, indeed.
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
To be more constructive: would you consider creating a hg tag for this question a reasonable way out of the problem? --- Edit: Ah, never mind, I see that you have just done that. But git is still the first tag, so the titlepage will not change. :(
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
... Now I understand your point that git is specifically mentionned and thus deserves that tag. That's why I ask if it would be better if svn was mentioned instead of git? It would make no difference to the question, but now the tag wouldn't exist, making it less tempting to add. But intrinsically, since it doesn't make a difference to the question, it shouldn't make a difference to the tagging... Hence, why the git tag? (Btw, thanks, at least I got rid of the assumption that it should have been trivially accepted :) )
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
For the 1st comment: to be honest I have no idea either. :) For the 2nd: the point is that this question is about vc- (generic VCS support), not particularly about git. The OP chose to mention primarily hg (and not create a tag for it), and git (as I see it, only as an example to point out that his problem is not specific to one VCS). He chose to add the git tag for some reason (maybe I should have asked him that first), but this tag mad the question look specific to git. See for example the page title "git - Insert and strip..."! ...
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
"Ultimately, the problem is in the question, for tangetially asking an entirely new question." I disagree with that. Emacs does include a version-control system that works consistently with most VCSs. This is what the OP was using, and in this workflow, asking about git or hg is not two different questions. But a magit answer would definitely be off-topic. (For example if you replace git with svn in the question, is it better? I surely hope not!)
1d
comment "Deviates from the original intent"?
So that implies that it is ok to use tags to mark "tangential relations", or hard relations? If tangential relations are enough, should we tag all generic {version-control} questions with {git}, {hg}, {svn}, {bzr}... ?
1d
reviewed Leave Open Error missing $
1 2 3 4 5