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
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 8 Dec 2008 08:35:35 +0100
Reply-To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From:
Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Will Robertson writes:
 > On 08/12/2008, at 2:04 AM, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
 > >
 > > well you got me thinking on that level, because tlp could be named  
 > > tlist to
 > > fit with plist clist.
 > >
 > > the problem seems to be more in the later addition of the \tlist  
 > > functions
 > > that in contrast to anything else do not operate on some storage  
 > > bins but on
 > > tokens in the input stream.
 > 
 > Hmmm, I agree tlist would be nice and consistent; after all we don't  
 > have "clist pointers" and "plist pointers". But then what would we  
 > rename what are currently tlists?

that's the problem. It is something like \tlstream or \tstream (operating on
an input stream of token (list)), but I'm not sure this makes it better (only
longer)

Another point to consider is that _tlp is the predominant storage bin used
all over the place, so something snappy might be preferable over something
longer (such as _tlist)

frank

ATOM RSS1 RSS2