X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["679" "Tue" "15" "March" "1994" "03:49:38" "+0000" "Laurent SIEBENMANN" "viro@MATUPS.MATUPS.FR" nil "16" "nag nag nag" "^Date:" nil nil "3" nil nil nil nil] nil) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/24.6.93) id AA13989; Tue, 15 Mar 94 06:47:58 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/03.06.93) id AA14419; Tue, 15 Mar 94 06:47:57 +0100 Received: from tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de with SMTP id AA29782 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4(mail.m4[1.12]) for <@MAIL.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE:Schoepf@SC.ZIB-BERLIN.DE>); Tue, 15 Mar 1994 06:47:55 +0100 Message-Id: <199403150547.AA29782@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de> Received: from TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE by tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 0742; Tue, 15 Mar 94 06:47:18 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin MAILER@DHDURZ1) by TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 0741; Tue, 15 Mar 1994 06:47:18 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin LISTSERV@DHDURZ1) by VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 9782; Tue, 15 Mar 1994 03:49:39 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Tue, 15 Mar 1994 03:49:38 +0000 From: Laurent SIEBENMANN Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: nag nag nag Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1598 nag nag nag Incidentally, LaTeX was the only format that was at first intolerant of these *not* very sophisticated Caesar macros. That intolerance was entirely caused by LaTeX's (unnecessary!?) fragilities (arising from use of edef-type expansion on tokens delivered by B.L. User). Exactly the same sort of headache occurs when ;:?! are activated for French. Without undue exageration could it be said that every macro introduced into LaTeX should be vetted by every one of a long list of LaTeX fragilities? I would like to see these fragilities eliminated. Or at very least severely regimented. Is that too much to ask of 2e? Laurent Siebenmann