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:
Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:03:43 +1030
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (19 lines)
On 20/10/2008, at 6:12 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:

> Reading through l3basics, I see that \def_test_function_new:npn  
> creates
> FT variants of the tests as well as TF, T and F ones.  However, the FT
> variant doesn't get mentioned anywhere for the tests created.  Is this
> needed, and if so shouldn't it be mentioned.

I noticed that recently too. I think it would be better to remove that  
variant in the expl3 syntax, since it doesn't seem like it adds much  
of importance but it adds a bit of obfuscation. I mean, if you're used  
to true/false code to usually be {...true...}{...false...} then  
switching that every now and then and only indicating it by FT instead  
of TF is kinda hard to spot.

Anyone else have additional thoughts?

W

ATOM RSS1 RSS2