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:
Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 7 May 2011 10:23:55 +0930
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (15 lines)
Hi,

Florent Chervet has suggested on c.t.t. the following definition for a quark:

> \def\quark\quark{\quark} 

with error message "Use of \quark doesn't match its definition" if it's ever accidentally executed. I *think* this definition still fulfils the use case for quarks themselves, but I wonder if it would involve a little too much code shuffling to be worth implementing for expl3.

(And it makes it more difficult to peek inside a quark, if that's ever necessary.)

Before I forget about this idea, does anyone have any comments on the matter?

Cheers,
-- Will

ATOM RSS1 RSS2