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

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

 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]> Subject: \begin{} ... \end{} From: Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]> Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 16:07:14 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]> Parts/Attachments: text/plain (25 lines) Hello all, The recent question about macro names got me thinking about how environments should be implemented in LaTeX3. I think I've seen this mentioned briefly somewhere, but not really worked through. My thinking is that, although using \ ... \end is convenient, it is probably not the best way to (1) keep user and internal macros separate and (2) to show what is going on. I'd therefore imagine a "virtual" module begin used for all of the \begin/\end names, something like: \envs__begin:w % Seems easiest here to use :w \envs__end: That means that the business with \end... is removed from command creation much clearer) and that there is no possibility of accidentally using an environment-starting command without \begin. Of course, this is still "some way off", but it seems worth thinking about in the wider context of refactoring expl3 and discussing keeping user function names under control. -- Joseph Wright