LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

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

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:39:32 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
On 26/10/2011 21:13, Lars Hellström wrote:
>> I'd argue, though, that it is useless. If you want named parameters,
>> key-value input is much more powerful.
> 
> A lot of the time: yes; and I can certainly live with numbered
> parameters. It does however become a bit awkward when you add another
> optional argument to an xparse-defined command that already has a lot of
> arguments, since you will then find yourself having to renumber most #n
> in the replacement text. Trivially doable, but something of a
> maintenance problem.

Hence the general feeling that we should probably not use too many
optional arguments, in the main

  \foo[<keyvals>{mandatory}...
-- 
Joseph Wright

ATOM RSS1 RSS2