Sender: |
|
Date: |
Thu, 20 Aug 2015 18:04:27 +0930 |
Reply-To: |
|
Message-ID: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=UTF-8 |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Bruno Le Floch <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Such code may be simplified (and sped up a bit) if we provided a
> \peek_case_charcode:NnTF function. Is there interest for such an
> additional function?
>
> Actually, looking at mhchem a bit more, it seems that there is
> probably room for simplification if we provided better tools for
> parsing.
Yes, I think that would be sensible — I do some (somewhat manual)
peeking in unicode-math (looking ahead for superscript chars, etc.)
and the nesting of the code is pretty ugly. This could be an area that
could also benefit from a more structured way to do "do this and
gobble until marker if true, else another test" code pattern that
we've briefly discussed.
I should revisit *why* I thought the built-in peek functions weren't
enough when I first wrote the code... it's probable that things have
changed in the kernel since then.
Cheers,
Will
|
|
|