[texhax] Calss file

Ing. Alessio Plebe alessio at ylem.njit.edu
Tue Jun 3 08:06:35 CEST 2003

---- philip.ratcliffe at uninsubria.it wrote ----
> > but for your own use, I personally see it easy and convenient.
> I have to disagree, in principle.  There's a great deal of work to writing
> real packages and many (very many) already exist.
> On the other hand, if all that you want is to conveniently collect your own
> personal (re)definitions of the sort \newcommand\PGR{Philip G. Ratcliffe}
> then there's essentially nothing to it.

yes, probably the disagreement is in the meaning of "package", on one side as
a coherent set of definitions aimed to a specific goal, or on the other side just
 a technical way of collecting heterogeous definitions and setups.
And for the first meaning you're right.
I just claim that the facilities available in package (and not at LaTeX document
level), such as writing code to be executed ad certain part of the document,
conditional passing of options to other packages and so on, are useful also
for the "weaker" meaning of package, and worth spending a few time learning
how it works. At least, that's my experience.

More information about the texhax mailing list