Print

Print


On 15/04/2011, at 9:52 AM, Bruno Le Floch wrote:

>>> * These should probably be consistent.
>>> * I think returning a quark is dangerous in case of sloppy package
>>> authors.
> 
> From the seq point of view, I like the idea of \seq_pop:NNF, with a
> \seq_pop:NN variant for an expl3-provided error.

We seem to be in large agreement on this particular point (speak up if not), so let's pencil it in to be incorporated into the revisions to seq.

-- Will