 
Date:
Tue, 21 Sep 2010 07:32:10 +0200
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Type:
multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="------------enig6C863957885940B5B1201174"
|
Will Robertson wrote:
> On 21/09/2010, at 2:50 PM, Arno Trautmann wrote:
>
>> Will Robertson wrote:
>>> On 20/09/2010, at 11:27 PM, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
>>>
>>>> is there actually any need for the :nnn etc versions?
>>>
>>> Not sure, is there?
>>> They seem natural to me; better than nesting multiple :nn commands for more than two ‘and’ branches, say.
>>
>> But then you’re lost at five ”and“. What about, say
>> \bool_and_p:n {\bool1,...,\booln}
>> i.e. a list of boolean expressions? (Just for the interface, no idea how
>> to implement this in an efficient way)
>
> Why not just use && in the first place?
Because of possible catcode-troubles? ;)
Or maybe such a list might be more useful for a xor operation.
cheers
Arno
|
|
|
