LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 27 Feb 2015 16:21:35 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (33 lines)
On 27/02/2015 15:39, Élie Roux wrote:
> Dear All,
> 
> Thank you very much for this update!
> 
>> We have not at this stage addressed
>> attributes, callbacks or other areas that need new allocators. We hope
>> that over the coming months interested parties will work with us to
>> develop a coherent scheme in this area to be added to a future LaTeX2e
>> release.
> 
> I'd be more than happy to! It might end the weird situation we have now
> where 'luatexbase' and 'luatex' have conflicting allocators. Tell me
> when you're ready to work on this.

Indeed: that is the thinking.

In contrast to the situation with \newXeTeXintercharclass, there is not
currently anything in the .ini files for the LuaTeX-specific allocators.
We therefore felt it was too much to do in one release to address this
as there needs to be some discussion first and very likely careful
timing with the LuaTeX package-development community. We are very
mindful of the current 'luatexbase'/'luatex' situation, hence wanting to
be sure we get agreement on the required approaches.

At the moment the focus needs to be on the current update. Once that is
settled and shipped to CTAN I'll start a new thread here asking for
thoughts on the LuaTeX allocator situation. Probably a lot of the code
is essentially written already, so what will be important is an idea of
what is needed in the format.
--
Joseph Wright

ATOM RSS1 RSS2