Some of the commands in emacs are so long to type.
Still, I'd like them as M-x commands (not keyboard shortcuts) as I have so many, I'd start stumble on them.
And, the old ones should not be removed. It'll take a while getting used to the new ones.
Only way I could think of, doing it one by one like this. Better way?
(defun icd (dict) "Alias for ispell-change-dictionary"
(interactive "sDictionary: ")
(ispell-change-dictionary (downcase dict)))
Use defalias:
(defalias 'bc 'emacs-lisp-byte-compile)
Before defining aliases for every command, you should use ido-mode
See here: EmacsWiki
If you put
(setq completion-styles (append completion-styles '(initials)))
(define-key minibuffer-local-completion-map
[?\M-\t] 'minibuffer-force-complete)
in your .emacs, then M-x icd M-TAB M-TAB will get you ispell-change-directory. And next time around, a single M-TAB will be sufficient (because the cycling prefers entries that are found in the history).
Related
I'm trying to learn Emacs and eLisp by writing some simple macros. Here is one of them:
(global-set-key (kbd "C-c d") 'local-delete-line)
(defun local-delete-line ()
"deletes 1 line"
(interactive)
(beginning-of-line)
(set-mark-command)
(next-line)
(delete-region))
Unfortunately, after triggering C-c d (or any other hotkey that I set up by global-set-key), Emacs responds with this:
Any ideas what can cause this?
To troubleshoot, I've removed my whole .emacs file, created an empty one, and I've put only the definition of local-delete-line function, together with global-set-key command. Emacs still produces garbage when invoking the function.
Start by reading the doc of set-mark-command (C-h f set-mark-command). See what it says about not setting the mark in code you write. See how many arguments it requires.
Read the doc of delete-region: it requires two arguments.
Do M-: (setq debug-on-error t), and then try your recipe. The backtrace buffer will tell you what you have done wrong.
State what it is that you are trying to do. So far, it seems like you just want to delete or kill a line. If so, what's wrong with C-k?
I'm looking for a way to include some filtering in the other-buffer method in emacs.
Currently calling other-buffer pulls up the last most recent buffer, but the problem with this is that buffers that get modified by external processes keep coming up as other-buffer. I would like to implement some sort of filtering in other-buffer.
Currently I use evil with C-^ bound to other-buffer, and I have some tail.el buffers active, and when I try to switch bufffers the tail buffers keep popping up.
Is there some alternative to other-buffer or could someone scratch up some code to implement this, Thanks.
What has worked for me is winner-mode - it's like an undo, but for window configurations.
Here's my setup:
(winner-mode)
(global-set-key (kbd "<f7>") 'winner-undo)
(global-set-key (kbd "C-<f7>") 'winner-redo)
Also I'd recommend other-window on some very cheap shortcut, since it's
a command that's used a lot.
I've put it on C-p, since I didn't appreciate the inconsistency
that one of the direction keys is so far away from others.
I've got previous-line on C-h instead, so now
my direction keys are n h f b - they're almost together!
And I didn't really miss the defaults on C-h, since f1
has the same functionality.
Ok so I got some workable solution but its not perfect it using bits from this answer:
emacs lisp, how to get buffer major mode?
(defun buffer-mode (buffer-or-string)
"Returns the major mode associated with a buffer."
(with-current-buffer buffer-or-string (format "%s" major-mode)))
(defun other-buffer-ex ()
(interactive)
(switch-to-buffer
(if (string-equal (buffer-mode (other-buffer)) "comint-mode")
(next-buffer) (other-buffer))))
In LaTeX mode C-c C-c is bound to:
(TeX-command-master &optional OVERRIDE-CONFIRM)
Normally this interactive function runs a command, perhaps a LaTeX compilation, asking for confirmation.
In tex-buf.el it reads:
If a prefix argument OVERRIDE-CONFIRM is given, confirmation will
depend on it being positive instead of the entry in `TeX-command-list'.
This is a bit cryptic for me and reading C-h v TeX-command-list didn't help.
How can I pass the prefix argument to "TeX-command-master" so that I avoid all the confirmation requests?
Take a look at Emacs' documentation to find out about prefix arguments. In general, you can pass a command a prefix argument with C-u followed by a number. For one-digit numbers, you can also just type Meta followed by the digit. Thus to pass a positive prefix argument to TeX-command-master you could type:
M-1 C-c C-c
However, this will actually add another minibuffer confirmation, namely about the shell command to be used to compile the LaTeX source. Without the prefix argument, a command-dependent default is used for that.
If you want to avoid the question about the command to use, you can bind the undocumented variable TeX-command-force to "LaTeX" via:
(setq TeX-command-force "LaTeX")
However, this will have the downside that you're basically binding C-c C-c to the "latex" command, you cannot use any of the other commands such as "bibtex" or "view".
Other than that, LaTeX-mode does not allow for any customization of C-c C-c. Your best options are to either advise the function TeX-command-query or to bind C-c C-c to a wrapper function to set TeX-command-force dynamically. The latter would probably be the preferred option if you also want to auto-save the buffer.
It seems that the mystery of the OVERRIDE-CONFIRM continues. In the meantime a fellow suggests that, if we are unable to manage TeX-command-master, we can simply rewrite it.
In my version, based on his, if the buffer is not modified, the external viewer is launched; if the buffer is modified the compiler is run.
Everything with no confirmation for saving or running the given command.
(defun my-run-latex ()
(interactive)
(if (buffer-modified-p)
(progn
(setq TeX-save-query nil)
(TeX-save-document (TeX-master-file))
(TeX-command "LaTeX" 'TeX-master-file -1))
(TeX-view)))
Of course one can bind my-run-latex to whatever keybinding.
On the user's point of view this is a solution to my own question.
Do I click the close tag? Well, on the curious guy point of view I am still interested in understanding the mysterious TeX-command-master technicalities.
If someone should happen to know...
P.S.
Yes, TeX-save-query overrides the save-file request, also with TeX-command-master, that is C-c C-c. But you will still be asked to confirm the command action.
Build & view
Again, this solution, instead of modifying the behaviour of the TeX-command-master, rewrites it. The rewritten version of the command, named build-view, follows a rather straightforward logic.
If the LaTeX file buffer is not-modified, it runs the default viewer;
If the buffer is dirty, it runs the default LaTeX compiler and, after the build, opens the output in the default viewer.
Here's the code:
(defun build-view ()
(interactive)
(if (buffer-modified-p)
(progn
(let ((TeX-save-query nil))
(TeX-save-document (TeX-master-file)))
(setq build-proc (TeX-command "LaTeX" 'TeX-master-file -1))
(set-process-sentinel build-proc 'build-sentinel))
(TeX-view)))
(defun build-sentinel (process event)
(if (string= event "finished\n")
(TeX-view)
(message "Errors! Check with C-`")))
You can now type M-x build-view and start the told build-view process or associate it with a new keybinding such as “F2”:
(add-hook 'LaTeX-mode-hook '(lambda () (local-set-key (kbd "<f2>") 'build-view)))
Note: As suggested by Tyler, TeX-save-query variable is changed locally, therefore the old C-c C-c/ TeX-command-master is unaffected and will keep asking confirmations.
Do edit this code to make it better or easier to read!
I puzzled over the OVERRIDE-CONFIRM bit for a while, and couldn't figure out how it was supposed to work. If you want to automatically run Latex on your file, without being bothered about saving it first, or confirming that you want latex (rather than view, bibtex etc), you could use a function like this:
(defun my-run-latex ()
(interactive)
(TeX-save-document (TeX-master-file))
(TeX-command "LaTeX" 'TeX-master-file -1))
Bind this to something handy, and you'll still have C-c C-c for when you want to use the default processing commands. You may want to modify the TeX-command line if "Latex" isn't the processor you want to call.
If you are just looking to compile the latex source without a confirmation dialog, just add the following to your .emacs:
(setq TeX-command-force "")
You can then compile the source with C-c C-c and it won't ask to confirm. The only problem with this solution is that you can no longer change the command, but with most documents you won't want to. I might suggest that at the same time you can add this to your .emacs for even more flexibility, giving you a C-c C-c equivalent to the former behavior:
(define-key LaTeX-mode-map "\C-c\C-a"
;;; 'a' for ask, change to anything you want
(lambda (arg) (interactive "P")
(let ((TeX-command-force nil))
(TeX-command-master arg))))
You can then just work away at your document, do a C-x C-s, C-c C-c and then C-c C-v to see it. Like others have suggested you can also do the same for the save command and have it compile automatically on save, but some of my documents are in CVS and so I avoid putting hooks on that.
Credit to Ivan for some help on this one - don't know if he is on StackOverflow
I think the gist of this question is "how do I quickly compile my TeX document from AUCTeX without all the key presses and confirmations?"
My answer to that is to use the latexmk command rather than trying to coerce AUCTeX to do it.
latexmk -pdf -pvc myfile.tex
latexmk will monitor the file in question and rebuilt it as soon as you save it. If you use a good pdf viewer, it will notice the change in PDF and re-display it immediately. On OS X, skim works well for this.
I've been using ido-mode for a few months, with ido-everywhere turned on, and am generally pretty happy with it. There's one thing I wish I could change, though. When I type C-u M-x shell to create a new shell buffer with a specific name, ido offers me a completion list of all of my open buffers. If I choose one, a new shell is launched in that buffer and it's put into shell-mode, no matter what it contains. It's hard to imagine a useful use case for this.
Is there a way to deactivate ido-mode for the shell command only? (As well as any other similar commands I may stumble across in the future, of course.)
Heh, it turns out you'll get the same completion choices whether or not you have ido-everywhere enabled.
There's no built-in way to do what you want. ido-mode only provides hooks for you to be able to override whether or not the find-file behavior is taken over by ido or not. The read-buffer is currently always overridden by ido-everywhere.
Luckily, a little Emacs lisp can get what you want:
(put 'shell 'ido 'ignore)
(defadvice ido-read-buffer (around ido-read-buffer-possibly-ignore activate)
"Check to see if use wanted to avoid using ido"
(if (eq (get this-command 'ido) 'ignore)
(let ((read-buffer-function nil))
(run-hook-with-args 'ido-before-fallback-functions 'read-buffer)
(setq ad-return-value (apply 'read-buffer (ad-get-args 0))))
ad-do-it))
And for any other command you don't want following ido-everywhere for buffer selection can be customized by simply adding a new expression to your .emacs:
(put 'other-command-i-want-untouched 'ido 'ignore)
Vim's Ctrl+N generally works like this: I type few letters, hit Ctrl+N, and Vim provides me with completions based on words in my all opened buffers.
Solution for Emacs doesn't have to be identical. I mainly use it like this: declare variable, then use it in later code. But I like the lightweight approach of not parsing the source code.
You want dabbrev-expand, bound to M-/ by default. I haven't used Vim, but from your description, it does the exact same thing.
try hippie-expand, bound to your favorite key
(global-set-key (kbd "M-/") 'hippie-expand)
Instead of presenting a completion-list, repeatedly hitting the bound-key cycles through the completions in-place.
Why "hippie"-expand? I have no idea, and I actually avoided looking at the function because the name was uninformative and off-putting, until I read the write-up at 'Life Is Too Short For Bad Code'. (The EmacsWiki entry on hippie-expand also asks "why 'hippie?'" but can't answer it, either.)
I personally use AutoComplete It gives you a nice dropdown box. You can select how many letters you want to type before it activates and customise what you want to show up, including stuff in dabbrev-expand.
;; Allow tab to autocomplete
(defun indent-or-expand (arg)
"Either indent according to mode, or expand the word preceding point."
(interactive "*P")
(if (and
(or (bobp) (= ?w (char-syntax (char-before))))
(or (eobp) (not (= ?w (char-syntax (char-after))))))
(dabbrev-expand arg)
(tab-to-tab-stop)))
(defun my-tab-fix ()
(local-set-key [tab] 'indent-or-expand))
(add-hook 'as-mode-hook 'my-tab-fix)
(add-hook 'java-mode-hook 'my-tab-fix)
(add-hook 'c-mode-hook 'my-tab-fix)
(add-hook 'sh-mode-hook 'my-tab-fix)
(add-hook 'emacs-lisp-mode-hook 'my-tab-fix)
The matter, in my opinion is that emacs completion I tryed doesn't complete regarding the context.
For instance, if you write some OOP with a method foobar() and an argument foo, M-/ will suggest you both foo and foobar.
But it would be great if you are calling an object method, not to provide just "foo" completion.
Has anyone a solution?
Aif> This requires much more than what "hippie expand" has to offer. If you code C/C++ you COULD use ECB http://ecb.sourceforge.net/ but frankly, the project is quite dead and this addon is not very reliable. If you need really good intelligent completion you should try Eclipse (CDT). But if you code python then Emacs (rope + flymake) is just as fine as Eclipse (PyDev).