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:
Tue, 9 Sep 2008 16:13:19 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Will Robertson wrote:
> 
> \def:Npn \store_something: {Something}
> 
> (I prefer it without the "0" argument spec.)
> 

I was wondering about this.  For macros with no arguments, I was
thinking :NNn has the advantage that the second N is "seen", whereas Npn
has an invisible p argument.

> 
> I think the philosophy is that \def:NNn and friends are designed to
> create "functions", whereas tlps and the like are designed to store "data".
> 
> So I'd choose the latter, but I'd be interested to hear the others'
> opinions.

That was my thought too.  I only noticed after I'd sent xnotes2bib to
CTAN, of course.  Well, I did say "experimental".
-- 
Joseph Wright

ATOM RSS1 RSS2