Sender: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 27 May 2014 12:12:05 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Message-ID: |
|
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 5/27/14, Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 27/05/2014 16:58, Bruno Le Floch wrote:
>> I tend to agree with you that we should not let \__dim_strip_pt:n and
>> \__dim_strip_bp:n accept arbitrary junk. That's easy to change, as
>> they are only used internally. On the other hand, the public
>> \dim_to_pt:n and \dim_to_unit:n are documented as allowing multiple
>> units, for the use-case Joseph describes.
>
> If you look over the current actual uses in the LaTeX kernel, they are
> focussed purely on some aspects of font use. I suspect we'd be better,
> long-term, to allow this sort of thing if at all only at the interface
> layer, and to have all of the 'general' code stuff expect 'well defined'
> dimensions. Means a doc change, but I feel an reasonable one.
My worry is not about doc changes, but about people who might be using
\dim_to_pt:n "in the wild". We'd be breaking code. Can we have a
deprecation period?
Bruno
|
|
|