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: Fri, 28 Jul 2023 18:39:58 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: David Carlisle <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Organization: NAG
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (33 lines)
On 28/07/2023 18:25, LARONDE Thierry wrote:
> Why in this case not having requested a \filefind primitive, with an
> argument specifying a required extension (an empty string if to be
> taken as is), and using the return value with other primitives (size,
> moddate, md5, dump) doing no search and no extension (very "primitive"
> primitives)?

you are asking on a latex list, but this is not a latex issue.

\pdffilesize has had this behaviour in pdftex for decades, and another
primitive isn't needed.

It does not seem surprising that all the file primitives use the same
logic which is documented for web2c tex in the kpathsea manual section
6.2 so it is not specially documented in the pdftex manual  where each
file primitive searches.

Conversely in prote currently there is the documented difference that
\filesize uses a different handling than \input.  That only needed
documentation as it an unexpected difference.



The Numerical Algorithms Group Ltd is a company registered in England and Wales with company number 1249803. The registered office is: 30 St. Giles, Oxford, OX1 3LE, United Kingdom. Please see our Privacy Notice <> for information on how we process personal data and for details of how to stop or limit communications from us.

This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses and malware by Microsoft Exchange Online (EOP)