[luatex] a question about the names \Umathcharnumdef etc

[jfbu]

Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:43, jfbu <jfbu at free.fr> a écrit :

> 
> Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:37, David Carlisle <d.p.carlisle at gmail.com> a écrit :
> 
>> On 15 October 2015 at 18:35, jfbu <jfbu at free.fr> wrote:
>>> Hi Joseph
>>> 
>>> Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:29, Joseph Wright <joseph.wright at morningstar2.co.uk> a écrit :
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hello Jean-François,
>>>> 
>>>> The 'real' names of the primitives have always been just \Umath... For
>>>> some time they've been enabled with the "luatex" prefix.. The LaTeX team
>>>> have recently taken a more 'active' interest in directly supporting
>>>> LuaTeX (and XeTeX) by modifying latex.ltx to 'know' about these engines.
>>>> As part of that process, we've revised the approach to the newer
>>>> primitives and dropped the prefix 'out of the box'.
>>>> 
>>>> For code that needs to work both with older (pre 2015/10/01) and newer
>>>> (2015/10/01 onward) kernel releases, adding
>>>> 
>>>>  \directlua{
>>>>    tex.enableprimitives("luatex", tex.extraprimitives("Umath"))
>>>>  }
>>>> 
>>>> (for just the Umath set) will do the job. Alternatively, if the code in
>>>> your package gets modified to drop the prefix then
>>>> 
>>>>  \directlua{
>>>>    tex.enableprimitives("", tex.extraprimitives("Umath"))
>>>>  }
>>>> 
>>>> will ensure that the 'natural' names are available with older kernel
>>>> releases.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> OK, let's see if I get you right: I remove from mathastext.sty
>>> all "luatex" prefixes, but also I need to add
>>> 
>>>  \directlua{
>>>    tex.enableprimitives("", tex.extraprimitives("Umath"))
>>>  }
>>> 
>>> to mathastext.sty if it detects luatex,
>>> 
>>> so as to be sure the new version of the package will work also
>>> with older LaTeX releases ?
>>> 
>>> is that right ?
>>> 
>>> best,
>>> 
>>> Jean-François
>> 
>> 
>> That works in general for primitives that were previously prefixed
>> \luatex... but the \Umath... names are special in that they were
>> previously available both prefixed and not prefixed, so you can just
>> use the unprefixed ones.
>> 
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> ok, this is very clear, thanks, sorry if I have one last question does
> "previously available" mean "all the way back to 2011" ? 
> 
> I can't test it on my laptop which only has TeXLive 2012 and later,
> and I would like not to break installations as far back as 2011,
> 
> best
> 
> Jean-François

Hi David/Joseph,

[ I apologize to the list, perhaps I should move this discussion to 
a LaTeX list ]

sorry again, but texdoc ltnews did not give me the following info:

should I also remove the "xetex" prefixes and use "\Umathchardef" 
also under XeLaTeX ? from texdoc xetex, the primitives are there
only with "U" prefix.

best,

Jean-François