> I know that I will not make friends in the Latex Team with these
> comments, but I'm being very honest in my opinions. Sorry.
You will make friends in the latex team. (Were we ever enemies:-)
You have _used_ the code and commented on it. That is all we ask.
We can hardly have a requirement that all comments must be favourable.
As I'm at work, haven't yet unpacked your attatchment, so no comments
yet on that. But a few replies to your opening remarks.
> typos are more frequent now (for example
> a typo in \ifx is very unlikely, but not in \if_meaning:NN).
typos in \ifx itself are unlikely (although I have seen people type \if
when they meant \ifx...) however (and this is the point) typos in some
\ifx a b
are quite likely.
If you don't believe this try using calc package with the 1998/06/01
distribution. (and expect a patch release to remove the typo very
It would probably help to have a modified emacs (or other editor) mode
so that syntax highlighting and command completion worked on the
> 2. \@tfor requires an "other" colon and hence does not work in l3
As Frank commented earlier there clearly would have to be a L3 loop
module in any real system so problems with \@tfor (and its distinctly
strange syntax) are just temporary effects due to writing a higher level
package when some of the building blocks are not there.