> I know that I will not make friends in the Latex Team with these > comments, but I'm being very honest in my opinions. Sorry. You will make friends in the latex team. (Were we ever enemies:-) You have _used_ the code and commented on it. That is all we ask. We can hardly have a requirement that all comments must be favourable. As I'm at work, haven't yet unpacked your attatchment, so no comments yet on that. But a few replies to your opening remarks. > typos are more frequent now (for example > a typo in \ifx is very unlikely, but not in \if_meaning:NN). typos in \ifx itself are unlikely (although I have seen people type \if when they meant \ifx...) however (and this is the point) typos in some strange construction \ifx a b \expandafter \foo \else ... are quite likely. If you don't believe this try using calc package with the 1998/06/01 distribution. (and expect a patch release to remove the typo very shortly) It would probably help to have a modified emacs (or other editor) mode so that syntax highlighting and command completion worked on the proposed syntax. > 2. \@tfor requires an "other" colon and hence does not work in l3 > contexts. As Frank commented earlier there clearly would have to be a L3 loop module in any real system so problems with \@tfor (and its distinctly strange syntax) are just temporary effects due to writing a higher level package when some of the building blocks are not there. David