LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 27 May 2014 12:12:05 -0400
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
From: Bruno Le Floch <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (20 lines)
On 5/27/14, Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On 27/05/2014 16:58, Bruno Le Floch wrote:
>> I tend to agree with you that we should not let \__dim_strip_pt:n and
>> \__dim_strip_bp:n accept arbitrary junk.  That's easy to change, as
>> they are only used internally.  On the other hand, the public
>> \dim_to_pt:n and \dim_to_unit:n are documented as allowing multiple
>> units, for the use-case Joseph describes.
> If you look over the current actual uses in the LaTeX kernel, they are
> focussed purely on some aspects of font use. I suspect we'd be better,
> long-term, to allow this sort of thing if at all only at the interface
> layer, and to have all of the 'general' code stuff expect 'well defined'
> dimensions. Means a doc change, but I feel an reasonable one.

My worry is not about doc changes, but about people who might be using
\dim_to_pt:n "in the wild".  We'd be breaking code.  Can we have a
deprecation period?