LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2009 13:23:11 +0200
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
From: Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (23 lines)
Heiko Oberdiek a écrit :
>> (This uses \@nil.) Putting the second split into a macro to test it against 
>> \@empty is safe, but one might dislike it as "slow".
> I prefer "safe".
I agree.

> An expandable test could be used, e.g.:
>   \ifx\\##2\\% or something else as \\

Is it "allowed" to use e-TeX commands inside the kernel? If so,

\expandafter\ifx\expandafter\\\detokenize{##2}\\% or something else as \\

is the safest test, as I'm sure you know.

Anyway, depending on the intended use of \in@, certain resctrictions (such as
"no unbalanced \if" or "no # token" or "no \@nil token" are probably acceptable,
as long as they are properly documented.