 
| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 7 Jan 2011 08:15:14 +0000 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Message-ID: |
|
| Subject: |
|
| MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
| Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed |
| From: |
|
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On 07/01/2011 06:32, Will Robertson wrote:
> I prefer "void" or "clear" instead of "unset" (all work as noun and verb), but I agree with changing the names. I don't mind the existence of "\box_use_clear:N" (or whatever) but I can see your argument against it. Is there any non-neglible performance decrease from writing
>
> \box_use:N \l_tmpa_box
> \box_clear:N \l_tmpa_box
>
> over
>
> \box_use_clear:N \l_tmpa_box
>
> ? If not, I'd be happy to drop the use_clear function for the reason of consistency, as you note.
Over all, I think 'void' is possible still the best choice. It suggests
more than just 'empty', which 'clear' does not. So \box_void:N,
\box_if_void:N(TF), etc., seem best.
--
Joseph Wright
|
|
|
