On 06/03/2011 10:47, Arno Trautmann wrote:
>> When I rewrote the coffins code, I originally included "c" variants, but
>> decided to leave them out pending seeing whether they were needed. I've
>> no objection to them, I was just trying to avoid 'variant overkill'.
>> Note that if you allow "c"-type names, then it's not just \coffin_new:N
>> that needs variants. All of the 'code-level interface' functions should
>> be done for consistency. This is the work of 5 minutes: shall I make the
> If no one else has needed it so far, I'll just add it to my package. I
> only asked to see if there was a special reason that coffin names should
> not be handled this way.
As I said, what would be nice is an idea of the context. It may well be
that we need the "c" variants: after all, until people try these things
out then it's hard to know.