LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML 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:
Bruno Le Floch <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 19 Apr 2011 16:20:12 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
>> Thinking about it some more, I am wondering: is it more important
>> - to distinguish keys which only differ by their catcode, or
>> - to allow for any token as a key (e.g. Hef{}feron, which currently
>> breaks the delimited argument approach) ?
>
> Hello Bruno,
>
> I'd say that at the very least we should _store_ tokens and not
> _strings_. So category codes should be preserved when putting stuff in
> or getting them out. After all, sequences might be used for all sorts of
> things, and the tokenization may be important.

Of course, the <value> must be a token list, but the <key> could be
more restricted?

I'm guessing that the use of a prop may be

\q_prop name \q_prop {S\o m\c{e}$t_{hi}n^g$}
\q_prop country \q_prop {Br\'azil}
\q_prop I.D. number \q_prop {2CUOHE@#@}
\q_prop ef{}ficiency \q_prop {12}
(etc.)

Here <values> may be anything, but <keys> are rather well behaved. The
key (sic) property of <keys> in my understanding is whether they
differ or not, and detokenizing will not cause too many collisions?

Regards,
Bruno

ATOM RSS1 RSS2