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 (Apple Message framework v928.1)
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Date:
Wed, 10 Sep 2008 01:55:52 +0930
Reply-To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (17 lines)
On 10/09/2008, at 1:34 AM, Mittelbach, Frank wrote:

> my take is that the recent addition of \def:NNn and firends was  
> already a mistake and should be reverted. These functions provide  
> something which at the expl3 level isn't really needed.

I'm undecided so far. I definitely see your side of the argument.

But it is nice to just write "4" instead of, say, "##1##2##3##4"; less  
characters means more clarity, in this case. Sometimes functions that  
define other functions can get a bit lost in all the octothorps.

On the other hand, it is only "syntactic sugar" for which we're paying  
(not so) precious expansions.

Will

ATOM RSS1 RSS2