LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML 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: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 21:53:19 +0200
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigE3EA70F86BB4AF0608D58A6D"
From: Arno Trautmann <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (897 bytes) , signature.asc (261 bytes)
Hi all!

Will Robertson wrote:
> Do you think it would be a good addition to expl3 to formalise this sort of programming structure? I guess it would be something like
> 
> \begin_active_char:n {^^@}
>   ...
> \end_active_char:
> 
> which doesn't really gain us too much.
> 
> What if ^^@ were *always* active as part of the expl3 syntax?
> 
> Just thinking out loud, really. Comments, thoughts?

Messing around a lot with active characters, Iíd love to have a simple
interface for defining them. (And also taking care of verbatim etc.)
A very nice thing for the Ēnormalď package author would be some macro

\define_active_char:Nn <character> {<code>}

which makes the <character> active and assigns the given code to it,
internally using the code that Will wrote.
I donít know if itís a good idea to make ^^@ always active. No reason
for this, just a gut feeling about too many active chars.

cheers
Arno



ATOM RSS1 RSS2