> Hi. I read an email that says that it is better to put a suffix to > the command to remember the argument type. I ask to my friends (my friends > are physics students thar are learning LaTeX) and they think that it isn't > good idea. i think you misunderstand the nature of the programming proposals that were posted on the archive. they were (it seems to me, though i *still* haven't read them in detail) proposals about programming latex itself, not for people such as yourself who use latex. > I like LaTeX as is, in fact I amn't a TeXpert maybe I am a > TeXnician, but I want to learn all about LaTeX. I subscribe to this group > thinking that you discuss how to program any thing, and send the macros, > then I can learn from the experts. really, the more common place for people to discuss > In Mexico nobody (who I know) has the TeXbook that must make life rather difficult... > (except the source code, but is ilegal to print it) and the same if for > The LaTeX companion, I am learning reading the source code for some > packages, but there are too much commands that I cant imagine ist function > or its syntax. the real point of the programming conventions is to make it *easier* for people to `just read' latex source, as you are hoping to do. at present, even experts have to think quite hard to understand the sources of some latex packages: hopefully the new conventions will help here. however, i don't think we'll ever get away from the need to understand at least the basic behaviour of tex itself. robin fairbairns.