[latexrefman] (manure, etc.\@) for sale

[Hefferon, Jim S.]

My understanding is that it does have the dual effect.  The example seems fine to me; it is intended to illustrate the effect of \@, which it does.  It might be used in a macro, for instance, where the slash-space may not make sense.

Jim
-----------------------------
https://vimeo.com/510385989

________________________________________
From: latexrefman <latexrefman-bounces+jhefferon=smcvt.edu at tug.org> on behalf of Vincent Belaïche <vincent.belaiche at gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2021 14:39
To: latexrefman
Subject: [latexrefman] (manure, etc.\@) for sale

⚠ External Sender ⚠


I am realigning the French on the English, at node \@@.

My understanding of \@ was that it makes an inter-sentence space where
LaTeX would otherwise use an interword space.

So in the example in this email object, I would have rather used

(manure, etc.)\ for sale

which indeed works well.

Now

(manure, etc.\@) for sale

also works well.

This means that the \@ command does not really force an inter sentence
space, but instead has the effect of forcing the other type of space
than LaTeX would have used. That is, where LaTeX would have used an
interword space, it forces an inter sentence space, and where LaTeX
would have used an inter sentence space, it forces an interword one.

Is that understanding correct ?

Do we really want to encourage this «(manure, etc.\@) for sale» space
fixing, while «(manure, etc.)\ for sale» also does the job.

Feedback welcome.
  V.