Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:45:07 +0930 |
Content-Type: | multipart/signed |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Hi again,
Sorry for the flurry of posts.
On 06/08/2009, at 3:23 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:
> Will Robertson wrote:
>>
>> One comment I have here is that in the future I don't see many people
>> defining weird combinations of arguments due to the prevalence of
>> keyval-style argument processing instead. I'd even think about
>> dropping
>> coordinate-style parenthesis input like "(x,y)" based on this. (Which
>> can be emulated easily enough with "d()" and a clist mapping in the
>> input.)
>
> The main reason for keeping a letter for (x,y) is that it can be a
> mandatory argument in LaTeX2e, so needs special handling.
If all we're trying to do is be able to emulate LaTeX2e, is there
anything wrong with writing something like this?:
... { d() }{
\IfNoValueTF {#1} { \ERROR } {
The real definition
}
}
Will
|
|
|