[pstricks] programming style of simple macro

[Patrick Drechsler]

Herbert Voss <Herbert.Voss at fu-berlin.de> writes:

> Patrick Drechsler schrieb:
>
>>> \define at key[psset]{pst-new}{offset}{\pst at getlength{#1}\PstWall at offset}%
>>> \define at key[psset]{pst-new}{thickness}{\pst at getlength{#1}\PstWall at thickness}%
>>> \define at key[psset]{pst-new}{MyWidth}{\pst at getlength{#1}\PstWall at MyWidth}%
>
> all "lengths" are saved as a value without a unit, it is by default
> pt and can be used directly inside PS code.

I see. That's why I was just lucky with my original "\edef" approach:

\define at key[psset]{pst-new}{offset}{\edef\PstWall at offset{#1}}%

I can now see why "\edef" is used for "strings", not "dims". 

On a side note: Understanding the difference between "\edef" and
"\def" will take up a lot of time, which is why I will postpone that
task...

[...]
>>> \def\PstWall{\pst at object{PstWall}}%read star/options, continue with @i
>>> \def\PstWall at i(#1)#2{{%
>>>   \pst at killglue
>>>   \addbefore at par{linewidth=4pt}% allows overwriting by the user
>>>   \use at par%				 set options
>>>   \rput{\PstWall at MyAngle}(#1){%
>>>     \psset{unit=1pt}%		     local setting
>> 
>> Why is this line not necessary when using objects such as
>> open/closed/special/alt?
>
> you are on TeX level, the reason why you have to tell TeX, that
> we have all lengths as pt. When writing a macro on low level,
> then you can use these lengths directly.

Understood. Is there a reason *not* to use a macro
open/closed/special/alt to avoid this problem? In other words: Would I
not be on the save side always using one of these macros?


[...]
>>>     \ifx#2\pst at empty\else
>> 
>> What is the difference between "\pst at empty" and "\empty"?
>
> we know, what \pst at empty is, but we do not really know,
> if \empty is the same. A user may have redefined it. It is only
> safe to use PSTricks macros.

I just skimmed the documented pstricks code you mention below. I guess
I must make a list of TeX <commands> which are replaced by
pst@<commands>. Obviously I cannot assume that every command has been
ported (i.e. there is no "\pst at ifx" or "\pst at else" in the line above).

[...]
>>>         \PstWall at thickness .5 mul \pst at number\pslinewidth add
>> 
>> I figure that "\pst at number" converts a dimension/length to an
>> integer. Is this correct? What other commands are there for conversion
>> (i.e. int2length)?
>
> \pst at number converts every length with a unit (a dimen) into
> an integer (strips the unit), the value then refers to pt.

OK. Before asking if there is something like "\pst at ConvertNumberToDim"
I will look it up in the commented pstricks code (see comments below).

> \documentclass{article}
> \usepackage{pstricks}
> \begin{document}
> \makeatletter
> \pst at dima=10cm
> \pst at number\pst at dima
> \end{document}
>
> the output is the value of the length 10cm in pt.

Very instructive, thank you!

>> Is something like this covered in detail in the current version of
>> your book? I only have the first edition, but I saw that the fourth
>> edition has twice as many pages. In the first edition these subjects
>> are covered too briefly for me to comprehend the full meaning.
>
> yes, there is now a bit more text

I have just ordered a copy of the current edition.

> The original documentation of the core of pstricks is here:
> ftp://ftp.tug.org/tex/PSTricks/pst-code.pdf

A first glance at pst-code.pdf answered further questions I have with
writing pstricks code. Thanks for the pointer. 

I am trying to write a package. Are there things I should be aware of
when using pst-xkey/xkeyval? Are there any tutorials on the usage of
xkeyval other than "texdoc xkeyval"?


Again, thank you very much! Your feedback is very much appreciated!

Patrick