Sender: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:19:59 +0100 |
Content-Disposition: |
inline |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=utf-8 |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 09:07:13AM +0100, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Am Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:44:06 +0100 schrieb Robert Alessi:
[...]
> > Any of the -dev engines fail to compile the attached .dtx file if the
> > “dox” package is loaded, but I am not sure the failure is caused by
> > this package.
>
> the new doc version used in latex-dev incorporates a few ideas of
> dox, see the documentation. Beside others it now also defines the
> command \SpecialMacroIndex, and defines it defined
> \SpecialUsageIndex with it:
>
> \def\SpecialUsageIndex{\SpecialMacroIndex}.
>
> As dox then does \let\SpecialMacroIndex\SpecialUsageIndex
> this loops.
>
> Probably dox would need a fix here, it should check if
> \SpecialMacroIndex is already defined. If I change dox to use
>
> \@ifundefined{SpecialMacroIndex}{\let\SpecialMacroIndex\SpecialUsageIndex}{}
>
> your skeleton compiles.
Thank you! I should have examined this more thoroughly. I used dox
because I needed a macro to describe options. But now I see that I
can say \NewDocElement{Option}{option}, which is fine.
Something similar affects the colordoc package because it redefines
doc's \macro@finish, which has been changed.
What should we do? Will the LaTeX3 team contact the authors of these
packages or should rather I do it myself?
> Thanks for trying latex-dev. It helps to identify such problems :-)
You are very welcome :)
Robert
> Ulrike
|
|
|