Sender: |
|
Date: |
Wed, 25 Mar 2015 05:15:08 +0000 |
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 2014-09-29 10:37, Denis Bitouzé wrote:
> Hi,
>
> among others, `.value_forbidden:` and `.value_required:` key properties
> from `l3keys` package are useful: they let us specify that a given key,
> when used, either cannot or must receive a value.
>
> What could be useful as well is a key property, say `.required:`, that would
> specify that the corresponding key /has/ to be used. This could be helpful for
> instance in the case of a document command `\MyModuleSetup` for setting up
> a module `mymodule`:
>
> \DeclareDocumentCommand \MyModuleSetup { m }
> { \keys_set:nn { mymodule } { #1 } }
>
> where some module property /has/ to be specified.
>
> I know this can be achieved with something like test of existence of
> some tokenlist and message emitted in case of nonexistence but a high
> level key property for this could be nice.
>
> May I ask what is your opinion about that?
>
> Thanks in anticipation.
>
Just a couple of thoughts, humbly offered with some uncertainty:
1. A compulsory key seems to me, on the face of it, to imply a
less-than-friendly user experience.
2. A simple solution might be to provide a default (such as "nil"), and,
'later in the package', test the key for "nil" and complain if it has
not been overridden.
Brent Longborough
|
|
|