LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Mon, 15 Feb 2010 13:36:59 +0100
text/plain (33 lines)
Philipp Stephani writes:

 > >> - \exp_arg_unbraced:No === \exp_after:wN
 > > 
 > > You'd like this to exist, you mean?
 > Yes, I just think it fits better with the other _unbraced macros (it would
 > be the simplest of those). 
 > Please note that the three points you commented on are just related to
 > design or style decisions, there is nothing wrong with how it is currently
 > implemented in expl3. 

for a start \exp_after:wN should normally not be needed except on very
low-level programming (which should largely only happen in the kernel). For
the rest the l3expan concept really provides a much more powerful and
consistent interface.

I know that for 2e programmers that is a bit of a getting used to as we all
used \expandafter in the past all over the place, but in reality it isn't
needed usually.

So providing yet another name for it isn't something I like to see without
compelling reasons and I'm not sure there is one (but perhaps 'm mistaken).

If we would add it then I guess the right name wouldn't be
\exp_arg_unbraced:No - it would fit more into the group of functions called
\exp_last_unbraced:N... but as I said I'm not really sure that adding that
would help, would it?