Content-Type: |
multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature";
boundary="------------enig2AC8026B537DE6D44B9D5C82" |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 3 Jan 2009 19:53:55 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Joseph Wright wrote:
> Arno Trautmann wrote:
>>> \latexstart
>> What is this good for?…
>
> Just an idea, based on \starttext from ConTeXt. I quite liked the idea
> that the entire document was within a "latex environment". Totally
> unnecessary, of course.
Isn’t the \starttext like \begin{document}?
>>> \itemizestart
>>> \item An item
>>> \item Another one
>>> \itemizeend
>> Now that I read code not written by me, I notize a disadvantage: It’s
>> much harder to distinguish macros from environments. Maybe
>>
>> \itemize_start
>> \item
>> \item
>> \itemize_end
>>
>> might be better?
>
> This takes us back to the category code of non-letter characters: I
> doubt that having _ as a document-level "letter" is a good plan. Of
> course, you could do something like
>
> \def\itemize_#1{% _ *not* a letter
> % Do tests on #1
> }
That’s not really beautiful…
Maybe \itemizeStart?
> I'm not sure that this is much of an improvement on sticking with the
> current scheme, however. Perhaps this shows us the wisdom of using
> \begin{...} and \end{...}.
Yes… I think, that was a very clever person who invented this…
cheers
Arno
|
|
|