LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

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: Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:33:00 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID: <772890524.4456383.1293712380000.JavaMail.fmail@mwmweb010>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
From: Uwe Lueck <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (21 lines)
"Reinhard Kotucha" <[log in to unmask]>, 30.12.2010 02:39:15:
> Please note that I regard LaTeX more as a markup language rather than
> a programming language.  LaTeX has a clear syntax, optional arguments
> are in box brackets, not in curly braces.  I don't see any good reason
> to break LaTeX's syntax rules deliberately.

We have presented examples before where present LaTeX syntax 
is not nice, and this still is my opinion.

A better proposal than using different category codes is 
programming macros with optional arguments obeying 
a convention that makes a choice of delimiters available to users.  
Any macro package replacing \@ifnextchar[ by some 
\ifx\let@token\opt@arg@delim could be run this way. 

If no LaTeXY will adopt this, I will call it L├╝TeX :-)

Cheers, 

    Uwe.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2