Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:55:18 +0200
Will Robertson writes:
> 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.
yes that's the case for which my argument breaks down a little bit, I
agree. But this is rather the exception .. and in most cases where double ##
marks show up you are usually doing weird stuff anyway like mixing inner and
outer args ... and within that inner definition you still need ## to denote
your arguments so ...
> On the other hand, it is only "syntactic sugar" for which we're paying
> (not so) precious expansions.
yeah ... and if people find it really useful ... I don't mind :-) that much it
is just that I don't see a need for them