At 14:58 +0100 98/06/25, Philip Taylor (RHBNC) wrote:
>>> I guess there will be a command called \tex_def or \tex/def or something,
>>> which one can use.
>Indeed, that was my very point : David was suggesting that \def could
>be made inaccessible by the format; I argued that all the while TeX lacks
>the equivalent of PostScript's "bind", primitives which are used by
>maos defined in the format source and which must be accessible to
>the user code can never be made totally inaccessible. You can "hide"
>them but you can't remove them, so why bother even to hide them if an astute
>programmer can work his way around the hiding mechanism?
I think the idea should be to help indicating objects proper use.
>(the earlier proposal to use commercial-at is just one way of hiding such
> things, neither better nor worse (in this context) than any other mechanism).
For use with modules, my suggestion is that @ should be used for
indicating that a command is "private" or "protected", that is not for
external use of that module.
So the command should then be named \tex/def and not \tex/@def, as some
other module is going to use it, like other modules defining \<module
* Email: Hans Aberg <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
* Home Page: <http://www.matematik.su.se/~haberg/>
* AMS member listing: <http://www.ams.org/cml/>