[latexrefman-discuss] Comment on rev481

[Hefferon, James S.]

I think Lamport's text is a good source for the include behavior.

It works great if you are including chapters, which is the design behavior, I think.  You can do something like 

    \includeonly{chap1,
        chap2,
        chap3,
        chap4,
        chap5}

and comment or uncomment those lines not of interest at the moment.

Jim

------------------------------------------------------

If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man accused of violating the Fair Housing Act by refusing to rent apartments to black people. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called Mexicans rapists, drug dealers and criminals. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called for a complete ban on Muslim immigration.

Patrick Thornton http://www.rollcall.com/im-a-coastal-elite-from-the-midwest-the-real-bubble-is-rural-america
________________________________________
From: Vincent Belaïche [vincent.belaiche at domain.hid]
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 14:03
To: Hefferon, James S.
Cc: Vincent Belaïche; latexrefman
Subject: Re: Comment on rev481

OK, I see. I did not know about this behaviour as I always use
brute-forcedly the more trivial \input.

I am meaning that what you say seems to be caused by the use of
\includeonly + \include. If I use \input instead, then the \newlabel's
go into test.aux

In node (info "(latex2e) Splitting the input") the almost only
difference mentionned between \input and \include is that one is an
incondition inclusion, while the other is triggered by \includeonly in
the preamble. Another mentionned difference is that \include cannot be
used recursively. But anyway, nothing is said w.r.t. to .aux file
production.

I heard that in general \include is more optimized for compilation time
and has some more constraints (ie you cannot split in any place with an
\include). It would certainly be good to elaborate on this. Any idea
where to find the info ?

  Vincent.

Le 22/11/2016 à 13:45, Hefferon, James S. a écrit :
>
> Vincent,
>
> Nice to hear from you.  Let me apologize that I haven't been a
> contributer lately.  There are a lot of balls in the air here.
>
> As to the question:  with this as test.tex
>
> ===== test.tex below ======
> \documentclass[12pt]{article}
> \includeonly{test1,
>              test2}
>
> \usepackage{lipsum}
> \begin{document}
> \include{test1}
> \include{test2}
> \end{document}
> ===== test.tex above ======
>
>
> and these as test1.tex and test2.tex.
>
> ===== test1.tex below ======
> \lipsum[1]
> \label{ex:test1}
> ===== test1.tex above ======
>
>
> ===== test2.tex below ======
> \lipsum[2]
> \label{ex:test2}
> ===== test2.tex above ======
>
> then running "pdflatex test" twice gives this.
>
> ftpmaint at domain.hid$ ls test*.aux
> test1.aux  test2.aux  test.aux
>
> The contents of those .aux files is what you would think.
>
> ftpmaint at domain.hid$ cat test1.aux
> \relax
> \newlabel{ex:test1}{{}{1}}
> \@setckpt{test1}{
> \setcounter{page}{2}
> \setcounter{equation}{0}
> \setcounter{enumi}{0}
> \setcounter{enumii}{0}
> \setcounter{enumiii}{0}
> \setcounter{enumiv}{0}
> \setcounter{footnote}{0}
> \setcounter{mpfootnote}{0}
> \setcounter{part}{0}
> \setcounter{section}{0}
> \setcounter{subsection}{0}
> \setcounter{subsubsection}{0}
> \setcounter{paragraph}{0}
> \setcounter{subparagraph}{0}
> \setcounter{figure}{0}
> \setcounter{table}{0}
> \setcounter{lips at domain.hid}
> }
>
>
> Regards,
> Jim
>
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man accused of violating the Fair Housing Act by refusing to rent apartments to black people. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called Mexicans rapists, drug dealers and criminals. If we pin this election on coastal elites, we are excusing white working-class and rural Americans for voting for a man who called for a complete ban on Muslim immigration.
>
> Patrick Thornton http://www.rollcall.com/im-a-coastal-elite-from-the-midwest-the-real-bubble-is-rural-america
>


---
L'absence de virus dans ce courrier électronique a été vérifiée par le logiciel antivirus Avast.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus