Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=us-ascii |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Fri, 7 Mar 2008 22:28:27 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]> writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> > What is your take? I find it clearly unsatisfactory to have LaTeX
> > eat up save stack for newly defined labels like that at the end of
> > the document.
>
> well, you seem to be the first person getting into trouble with this,
I doubt it. From ltxref.dtx:
% The internal form of |\newlabel| and |\bibcite|. Note that this
% macro does it's work inside a group. That way the local
% assignments it needs to do don't clutter the save stack. This
% prevents large documents with many labels to run out of save
% stack.
% \changes{v1.1h}{1995/10/24}{Switch for multiplelabels replaced by
% inline code}
% \changes{v1.1k}{2001/02/16}{Added an extra grouplevel (PR3250), jlb}
% \begin{macrocode}
\def\@newl@bel#1#2#3{{%
\@ifundefined{#1@#2}%
\relax
{\gdef \@multiplelabels {%
\@latex@warning@no@line{There were multiply-defined labels}}%
\@latex@warning@no@line{Label `#2' multiply defined}}%
\global\@namedef{#1@#2}{#3}}}
% \end{macrocode}
So obviously somebody ran into this problem before. But only half of it
got fixed.
> but that doesn't mean one shouldn't fix it.
> I don't really mind either of the three solutions (provided none of the kills
> the regression tests for 2e) but personally I would simply drop the group
> unless somebody can give me a good reason why it could be needed in a certain
> situation.
For restoring \@newl@bel's definition afterwards. Don't ask me why it
could be needed.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
|
|
|