## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

#### View:

 Message: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Topic: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Author: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] Font: Proportional Font

Subject:

Re: Missing expl3 primitives

From:

Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 25 Feb 2009 21:45:22 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (34 lines)
 Joseph Wright writes:  > The reason I'm interested in \everyeof as well is for using \scantokens  > in a context such as:  >  > \def\tempa#1{%  > \begingroup  > % Some catcode changes  > \everyeof{\noexpand}%  > \endlinechar-1\relax  > \edef\tempb{\scantokens{#1}}%  > \expandafter\endgroup  > \expandafter\def\expandafter\tempc\expandafter{\tempb}%  > }  >  > which fails without the \everyeof setting. That I know of there is no  > way to "bundle up" the various components, so without access to  > \everyeof, \scantokens is not much use (at least to me). sure. well for now I would suggest to use \tex_every_eof:D knowing quite well you do something you shouldn't (not that you could help it at this point in time:-) and with the knowledge that once we come up with an interface in l3file or else you may have to redo that bit of code. My point is that I don't want to saction the use of the primitive by giving it a name but what this also tells me is that we have to perhaps even retract on providing \scantokens as a primitive, but instead provide a scantokens interface which sets up its environment carefully (by, for example, copying a specific toks (e.g., \l_every_rescan_end_toks to \tex_every_eof:D prior to calling \etex_scantokens:D) rather than providing the primitive for direct use. frank

Advanced Options

#### Options

 Log In Get Password Search Archives Subscribe or Unsubscribe