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
Mime-Version:
1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=utf-8
Date:
Thu, 13 Sep 2018 13:56:04 +0200
Reply-To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Benedikt Vitecek <[log in to unmask]>
Message-ID:
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
> Of course we could invent the notion of modules that can only be used with a submodule part but I'm not sure that this is really a good idea. So perhaps better is to simply drip the underscore and call it cookingunits


Sounds good to me. It’s probably also better to write it without underscore in case someone uses the prefix „cooking“ and tries to define `@@_units_…` which could potentially clash 
with my package. 

I should be able to upload a new version within the next few days.

Greetings,
Ben

> Am 10.09.2018 um 23:09 schrieb Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>:
> 
> Am 07.09.18 um 16:36 schrieb Benedikt Vitecek:
>> I would like to register two package prefixes, but as there was a discussion about prefixes in June (I think)
>> I also wanted to ask if the prefixes are „okay“ (or if they are too general). Both packages are already
>> at CTAN for some years now, but changing the prefixes – if necessary – wouldn’t be a problem. Back then
>> I have chosen the prefixes simply to be equal to the package names.
> 
> Hi Benedikt,
> 
> update to my earlier statement.
> 
> Maybe cooking_units should be reconsidered and replaced perhaps by "cookingunits" without the underscore. Point is, conceptually the module name is really just everything up to the first underscore there is not concepts of only supporting  sub-modules yet.
> 
> Of course we could invent the notion of modules that can only be used with a submodule part but I'm not sure that this is really a good idea. So perhaps better is to simply drip the underscore and call it cookingunits
> 
> 
> regards
> frank

ATOM RSS1 RSS2