On 27/05/2014 17:12, Bruno Le Floch wrote: > On 5/27/14, Joseph Wright <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >> On 27/05/2014 16:58, Bruno Le Floch wrote: >>> I tend to agree with you that we should not let \__dim_strip_pt:n and >>> \__dim_strip_bp:n accept arbitrary junk. That's easy to change, as >>> they are only used internally. On the other hand, the public >>> \dim_to_pt:n and \dim_to_unit:n are documented as allowing multiple >>> units, for the use-case Joseph describes. >> >> If you look over the current actual uses in the LaTeX kernel, they are >> focussed purely on some aspects of font use. I suspect we'd be better, >> long-term, to allow this sort of thing if at all only at the interface >> layer, and to have all of the 'general' code stuff expect 'well defined' >> dimensions. Means a doc change, but I feel an reasonable one. > > My worry is not about doc changes, but about people who might be using > \dim_to_pt:n "in the wild". We'd be breaking code. Can we have a > deprecation period? > > Bruno A reasonable point, but not always possible when we make an 'in place' change (which are rare). Here, a sweep over TL2014 shows no uses outside of the kernel code: I'd hope the impact will be very low. -- Joseph Wright