[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 3 Jul 2012 23:36:08 GMT
Patrice and all,
We talked about giving documents a way to test if a given Texinfo
command was defined, so they could provide replacements for newer
commands. (Which, for the record, I'm still unconvinced is worthwhile,
but never mind.)
So what I think I've implemented in texinfo.tex are two new
and the `not' form,
In both cases, the CMDNAME is written without the @. (Much safer in TeX.)
Finally, the variable `txicommandconditionals' is now implicitly
defined, so the documents can know whether this feature is itself
Before I write the documentation ... does this look like the right
interface to you? Any ideas/suggestions/whatever? Below is a test
Again for the record ... the last case below (the spurious mathcode)
shows that the texinfo.tex is actually testing whether the TeX control
sequence is defined, and TeX + plain TeX + texinfo.tex define hundreds
of control sequences that are not Texinfo commands. It's theoretically
wrong, but since the problem has existed since day one (of @macro, at
least) and no one has ever reported a bug against it, I don't plan to
worry about it now. It would be a great deal of laborious work to
rectify it, and I don't want to take the time.
Good, the txicommandconditionals variable was set.
Bad, @@nodexyz is defined.
Good, @@nodexyz is not defined.
Good, @@node is defined.
Bad, @@node is not defined.
Unfortunately, @@mathcode is defined.
Happily, @@mathcode is not defined.
- @ifcommanddefined, etc.,
Karl Berry <=