LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:14:53 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]> ("Morten Høgholm"'s message of "Tue\, 1 Jan 2008 18\:46\:16 +0100")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15
From: Andreas Matthias <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (35 lines)
Morten Høgholm wrote:

> On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 14:31:52 +0100, Andreas Matthias wrote:
> 
>> Well, I am still pondering on this. How does \def:Npx fit into this
>> scheme? The x argument is not expanded before being passed to \edef.
> 
> The x argument is expanded before being passed on the
> \def:Npn. Which is  more or less true except currently it is
> implemented as a straight \edef  because it would otherwise suffer
> from the same problems as other  functions needing to go through a
> temporary variable in the \::x function.  With the \expanded
> primitive in pdfTeX 1.50 we should have uniform  behavior at last.
> 
>> Here are some other functions I just ran across, where the x might not
>> be appropriate: \io_put_deferred:Nx, \io_put_term:x, \io_put_log:x,
>> \err_message:x, \err_latex_bug:x. These names have the same problem
>> as the proposed \int_set:Nx, haven't they?
> 
> Most of those functions are from before eTeX was required and so
> now one  could say the base form of many such messages was, say,
> \err_latex_bug:n  which just outputs a message (making it literal
> with \unexpanded) and then  there are x variants in case one wants
> to use the value of some variable  in the output. You are pointing
> to an area of the code which hasn't  received much attention after
> we started extending expl3 and it could use  some cleaning up (so
> could our 4-day old daughter so I better look at that  first! :-).

Sounds all reasonable to me. But these explanations can be used to
promote \int_set:Nx, as well. And here we start again ... ;-)


Ciao
Andreas

ATOM RSS1 RSS2