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:
Lars Hellström <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:20:54 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard skrev:
> Hi,
> 
> Here are some remarks from my last reading of expl3.pdf (r1439).
> 
> 1. Concerning the terminology of "functions". Maybe it's worth mentioning at
> some point that the word function is used in opposition to variable, not to
> macro: theses two objects (functions and variables) remain actually macros, and
> TeX a macro language (like make or C preprocessor as opposed to C). Currently, I
> expect only experienced TeX programmers will look into expl3 so they should be
> mistaken, but for the TeX-programming newcomer, the peculiarities of a macro
> language are often so difficult to understand, that IMO expl3 should state
> clearly that it doesn't magically turn TeX into a classical programming
> language, and that the terms function/variable are only a convention, an not to
> be understood in their usual meaning.

Hear, hear!  d-(^_^)-b

> 2. Still terminology: sometimes "execution" is used when the most accurate term
> would be expansion (eg on the top of page 7). Again, I expect an experienced TeX
> programmer to understand what is actually meant, but I think that for the sake
> of less experienced readers, such language approximations should be avoided, or
> the document should include a warning that sometimes "execution" will be used as
> a generic term for execution-or-expansion-or-both.

I'd certainly expect "execution" to mean "this may involve doing things 
in the stomach".

Lars Hellström

ATOM RSS1 RSS2