Header line to specify TeX 'engine'?

[texworks]

Header line to specify TeX 'engine'?

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It's supposed to recognize the same %! lines as TeXShop. (Actually, it's a bit 
less strict about the form of the line 
than TeXShop currently is, but I hope Dick is going to relax the rules a 
little; we talked about this a while back.)

The exact behavior is slightly different from TeXShop's (this needs to be 
documented some day); in particular, 
the popup menu in the toolbar can still override the %!TEX TS-program line. But 
the basic format is the same.

If it doesn't work for you, there's probably a bug; if so, please give details 
of the failure.

Original comment by [email protected] on 31 Jul 2008 at 9:56

[GoogleCodeExporter]

It works! I must have been doing something really stupid the other day when I 
first
tried it and it seemed not to work.

I must say this is a really wonderful app. Many thanks.

Stephen

Original comment by [email protected] on 1 Aug 2008 at 5:08

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I meant to ask: If the %! line is present, under what circumstances can the 
popup
menu in the toolbar override it?

Thanks.

Stephen

Original comment by [email protected] on 1 Aug 2008 at 5:11

[GoogleCodeExporter]

When you click Typeset, it should use the engine that the popup shows. So that 
means you can override the 
%! line by setting the popup to something different after you've opened the 
file (or edited the line), and your 
manual setting will be used until/unless you close the file, or edit the line 
again thus triggering a re-scan of 
the metadata.

Offhand, I can't remember what happens if you click Typeset on an \included 
file; does it respect the popup 
of the root document's window, or does it always follow the %! line? Obviously, 
this all needs to be thought 
through, and documented somewhere.

(I'm closing this issue as "invalid", as I believe it currently works as 
intended; however, there are almost 
certainly cases that could use further thought and testing, as suggested above. 
So more specific enhancement 
requests or bug reports are still welcome on this topic.)

Original comment by [email protected] on 4 Aug 2008 at 7:05

• Changed state: Invalid