[XeTeX] newcommand with optional arguments

Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard mpg at elzevir.fr
Tue Mar 4 22:41:37 CET 2008


Hi Ross,

Ross Moore a écrit :
>> - #1 should not contain any # now;
> 
> Yes, there can be an extra complication here,
> depending upon how that # is intended to be used.
> If, for example, it is as \# , then it has already
> been tokenized, so it'll be OK; but others not so.
> 
Of course when i said # is was meaning "a catcode 6 token".

> Indeed; which is why I quickly followed my first post
> with a correction.  :-)
> 
I saw it just after my own post...

>> Useless, IMHO.
> 
>    ...  it can pay to be very careful.
> 
Sure, but I usually have one or two scratch macros like \next or \temp that I
don't mind to change globally, since I know I will never use them without
re-\def-ining them just before. I believe this is quite ok too.

> Yes; that can well be.
> Donald Arseneau writes good stuff; often needing to be studied
> very carefully to understand exactly how/why it works.
> 
:) I remember the first time I looked \@ifmtarg's code...

>> By the way, all this discussion has little (if at all) to do with  
>> XeTeX, and
>> would surely be more natural in comp.text.tx or so...
> 
> True. But the question arose here, and was answered (incorrectly) here,
> so a correction and further discussion should be made on this list.
> It would be wrong to have the posting with the original answer as
> the final message in this thread.
> 
Sure. By the way, that's why I answered in this list too: better have a good
discussion in the wrong place than the contrary. And good for us, Morten reads
this list too...

Manuel.




More information about the XeTeX mailing list