[tex-live] Possibility to enhance registers

[Robin Fairbairns]

Sigitas Tolusis <sigitas at vtex.lt> wrote:

> On Sep 24, 2012, at 10:13 PM, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> 
> > 2012/9/24 Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns at cl.cam.ac.uk>:
> >> Zdenek Wagner <zdenek.wagner at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> 2012/9/24 Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns at cl.cam.ac.uk>:
> >>> 
> >>>> position on page, perhaps?  we're operating in the dark, here: you're
> >>>> letting out snippets of information, none of which is likely to be
> >>>> diagnostic, so far.
> >>> 
> >>> It may be even more complex because page breaking is an asynchronous
> >>> operation.
> >> 
> >> which would explain the apparently random nature of the problem.
> >> 
> >> i wonder if "simply" redefining \mtc at BBR without that \unpenalty would
> >> solve the problem ... at least in this case.
> >> 
> > Yes, it will solve the problem but the question is why \unpenalty was
> > used. LaTeX contains its own internal structures and switches so that
> > the macros could know whether \penalty is needed. \addpenalty is often
> > used instead of the \penalty primitive. I do not know the internals of
> > the minitoc package. I do not know when I used this package the last
> > time, maybe 15 years ago...
> 
> What about to change \unpenalty 
> with \ifvmode\else\expandafter\unpenalty\fi
> in \mtc at BBR definition?

either would deal with the present case; it would be good to know if
there were adverse consequences, for future reference.

we need an analysis of what the author actually thought he was doing by
saying \unpenalty before adding a penalty of 10000 using \linebreak

fwiw, looking for drucbert on google, the most recent reference i can
find is 2008 when he wasn't replying to email.

i'll have another prod later, unless someone  authoritative cares to
intervene.

sigh....

robin