LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Classic View Use Proportional Font Show HTML Part by Default Show All Mail Headers Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

 Re: \tlp_put ... Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]> Fri, 12 Sep 2008 11:25:19 +0100 text/plain (24 lines) Will Robertson wrote:  > If it's going to need such contents, would it make more sense to use a > _toks datatype the whole way though? Okay, I have "redone the exercise" in this way. >> I wonder if there >> is a reason not to do: >> >> \def_long_new:Npn \tlp_put_right:Nn #1#2{ >> \tlp_set:Nx #1{\exp_not:o{#1}\exp_not:n{#2}} >> } >> >> which does not suffer from the same issue. > > Unless the whole point is to restrict its use in this case, I can't see > why this isn't a better approach. I suspect it wasn't coded like this in > the first place because \exp_not:n isn't available without eTeX. But I > don't think we should worry about that these days. That was my guess too. -- Joseph Wright