On 24/11/2008, at 5:30 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:

> Will Robertson wrote:
>> This brings up the question: is there any reason for us to keep the
>> modules logically separate? An easy fix might be to add
>> \RequirePackage{expl3} to the top of each l3module.
>
> But there will still be a sensible order to load things: l3names, then
> l3basics, then (hmm, don't know what's next!).

Yep :)
I guess we need to sort that out in expl3.sty itself. Although,  
miraculously, things have tended to work without too much thought put  
into the loading order.

>> Regarding the best way to fix this particular problem with l3tlp, an
>> alternative is to move
>>  \use_none_delimit_by_q_recursion_stop:w
>> into l3basics, where are also defined "\use_none_delimit_by_q_nil:w"
>> and so on.
>
> I'd agree.  My suggested fix was to get things working, but it seemed
> obvious that the better solution was to move the entire thing  
> earlier in
> the code.

In which case we'll start to move everything into l3basics :)

It would be good to keep that module as small as possible, but these  
delimit_by_some_quark \use functions kind of belong together anyway.

Before we start solving the problem properly, we should answer the  
question: "are the modules *supposed* to be able to be loaded  
independently?". I'm not the one to answer that...

W