Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.A171591C@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:33 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A171591C" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: {1} Re: {?} of ltx help files Date: Thu, 12 Mar 1992 23:25:26 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Multiple recipients of" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 620 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A171591C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Don said > I just discovered that if \tableofcontents (or one of its near > relatives) is in an \include'd file which is not included (because of > \includeonly) the table of contents is not updated. There are = arguments > for both; Well, yes and in the current latex this is the way it is. I don't think that people like to get all these toc lot ... files for their two page memo, so its really questionable. On the other hand I see Don's argument: I hoped for something like this myself sometimes. With ltx3 the problem may vanish as I think of perhaps getting rid of these additional files anyway. I don't believe that the overhead of reading the aux files fully several times, bypassing irrelevant information at high speed is worth the additional trouble of having so many additional files. In fact the current kernel prototype which I'm using at home knows only about aux files, in this case exactly two which allows to recover gracefully from a stop in the middle using X on some error. This is in my eyes a real winner. But I haven't made up my mind and many things in the current kernel are not even touched, so comments and suggestions are welcome as usual. cheers Frank Mittelbach P.S. After this hot debate on validating latex may I remind everybody on the list that there are still volunteers sought for preparing test files, I got a few offers but more are better if the automated system set up should be of any help. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A171591C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable {1} Re: {?} of ltx help files

Don said

> I just discovered that if \tableofcontents (or = one of its near
> relatives) is in an \include'd file which is not = included (because of
> \includeonly) the table of contents is not = updated. There are arguments
> for both;

Well, yes and in the current latex this is the way it = is. I don't
think that people like to get all these toc lot ... = files for their
two page memo, so its really questionable. On the = other hand I see
Don's argument: I hoped for something like this = myself sometimes.

With ltx3 the problem may vanish as I think of perhaps = getting rid of
these additional files anyway. I don't believe that = the overhead of
reading the aux files fully several times, bypassing = irrelevant
information at high speed is worth the additional = trouble of having so
many additional files. In fact the current kernel = prototype which I'm
using at home knows only about aux files, in this = case exactly two
which allows to recover gracefully from a stop in the = middle using X
on some error. This is in my eyes a real = winner.  But I haven't made
up my mind and many things in the current kernel are = not even touched,
so comments and suggestions are welcome as = usual.

cheers

Frank Mittelbach

P.S. After this hot debate on validating latex may I = remind everybody
on the list that there are still volunteers sought = for preparing test
files, I got a few offers but more are better if the = automated system
set up should be of any help.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.A171591C--