## 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:

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

Date:

Thu, 26 Feb 2009 18:32:43 +1030

Content-Type:

multipart/signed

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (35 lines) , smime.p7s (35 lines)
 On 26/02/2009, at 5:36 PM, Joseph Wright wrote: > Will Robertson wrote: >> After all this I now agree with Frank (that the every-toks require a >> wrapper to be useful, and expl3 isn't the place to do that), so let's >> agree to add \endlinechar directly (except we want >> \l_char_end_line_int >> instead of _endline_ I think) and... > > By the way, I assume the lack of \escapechar is deliberate? Uuuhm, no :) I'll add it to the list. >> (Sorry for my ignorance but what's the endlinechar part for? Maybe we >> don't need that?) > > Sometimes you need it, sometime you don't :-). I got this from > biblatex, where Philip has things like: [snip] > > As long as the suggested function will work under a range of possible > circumstances where \scantokens can be used, I'm happy. Well, I'll leave it there for now but I wonder if that implies we need a macro that has "setup" parameters: \tlist_rescan:nn{   \char_make_other:N \$\int_set:Nn \endlinechar {\c_minus_one} }{$a^1\$ } Will