>         Hi. I read an email that says that it is better to put a suffix to
> the command to remember the argument type. I ask to my friends (my friends
> are physics students thar are learning LaTeX) and they think that it isn't
> good idea.

i think you misunderstand the nature of the programming proposals that
were posted on the archive.  they were (it seems to me, though i
*still* haven't read them in detail) proposals about programming
latex itself, not for people such as yourself who use latex.

>         I like LaTeX as is, in fact I  amn't a TeXpert maybe I am a
> TeXnician, but I want to learn all about LaTeX. I subscribe to this group
> thinking that you discuss how to program any thing, and send the macros,
> then I can learn from the experts.

really, the more common place for people to discuss

> In Mexico nobody (who I know) has the TeXbook

that must make life rather difficult...

> (except the source code, but is ilegal to print it)   and the same if for
> The LaTeX companion, I am learning reading the source code for some
> packages, but there are too much commands that I cant imagine ist function
> or its syntax.

the real point of the programming conventions is to make it *easier*
for people to `just read' latex source, as you are hoping to do.
at present, even experts have to think quite hard to understand the
sources of some latex packages: hopefully the new conventions will
help here.

however, i don't think we'll ever get away from the need to understand
at least the basic behaviour of tex itself.

robin fairbairns.