## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Classic View Use Monospaced Font Show HTML Part by Default Show All Mail Headers Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

 Re: preamble declarations wanted David Carlisle <[log in to unmask]> Thu, 28 Jan 1999 17:01:33 GMT text/plain (28 lines) > 1. "\noblankpars": This appears to be \def\par{}, since a blank line is \par. (But some commands may get surprised if you do that) > 2. "\commandend{;}": LaTeX practice such as > "\LaTeX{} is great" > does not always leave quite the right space after I do not understand this comment. If used outside math mode, then \foo{} xxx will always leave the same amount of space as would be produced if \foo was replaced by its definition. Why is that not quite right'? In math mode, {} produces a mathord atom, but there the space in the input doesn't matter, so you can just do \foo xxx. > 3. "\strictargoptsyntax": that any command with a sequence of > arguments and/or options of postive length must have no white space at > all between the command name and the first arg/opt or between > successive arg/opt's. Why? Latex as in most other languages these days, white space between arguments is ignored. When is this ever not a desirable feature? Tex's handling of white space is often not desirable, but I have never thought this was bad. (In fact I put quite some effort in to making it be true in latex2e, rather than just almost true in 2.09) David `