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:
Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 5 Aug 2012 13:46:31 +0930
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (18 lines)
On 03/08/2012, at 9:53 PM, Bruno Le Floch wrote:

> Admittedly, none of the three "solutions" is great.  As Joseph notes,
> we've gone for a single line in the l3 source.  We could perhaps add
> \def\^^M{\unskip\space\ignorespaces} to the \begin{syntax} setup: this
> would allow
> 
>    \cs{some_function_with_a_very_long_name:nnnnn} \
>      \Arg{first argument} \Arg{second argument} \
>      \Arg{third argument} \Arg{fourth argument} \
>      \Arg{fifth argument}

I've been thinking for a while that having \obeylines in the syntax environment (which predates my involvement on this code IIRC) has made certain things rather awkward.

It would be an annoying change to have to implement in our sources, but what do you think about dropping \obeylines?

-- Will

ATOM RSS1 RSS2