Will Robertson wrote: > On 20/09/2010, at 11:27 PM, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > >> is there actually any need for the :nnn etc versions? > > Not sure, is there? > They seem natural to me; better than nesting multiple :nn commands for more than two ‘and’ branches, say. But then you’re lost at five ”and“. What about, say \bool_and_p:n {\bool1,...,\booln} i.e. a list of boolean expressions? (Just for the interface, no idea how to implement this in an efficient way) cheers Arno