On 12/10/2011 17:59, Bruno Le Floch wrote: > I think that Lars has in the past [1] advocated against the infix > syntax as being an attempt to impose upon TeX some foreign and not > very appropriate syntax (please correct me if I misunderstood you). In > this perspective, providing \and:nn etc. as Lars proposes would be > much faster than the current approach, and would accomodate trivially > for non-expandable conditionals. There was certainly some discussion of infix notation. I have mixed feelings as using "&&" raises some awkward issues, if nothing else. Performance-wise, it will always be slower than grabbing arguments, but on the other hand infix is rather easier to follow. -- Joseph Wright