References: <5.1.0.14.0.20050325194659.02471690@pop3.web.de>
            <yfivf7fqyhl.fsf@triumf.ca>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <x5sm2jwfnc.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
Date:         Fri, 25 Mar 2005 22:59:35 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>
From: David Kastrup <dak@GNU.ORG>
Subject: Re: \@reinserts
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <yfivf7fqyhl.fsf@triumf.ca> (Donald Arseneau's message of "Fri,
              25 Mar 2005 12:09:10 -0800")
Precedence: list
Status: R

Donald Arseneau <asnd@TRIUMF.CA> writes:

> Uwe Lück <uwe.lueck@WEB.DE> writes:
>
>> No, sorry, it rather seems that the proposal in latex/3719 has
>> little to do with my situation. Before I think about what to do
>> with \@reinserts, I must find out how \holdinginserts>0 affects the
>> \footins box.
>
> Triggering the output routine with \holdinginserts>0 means
> *nothing* is put in the footins box. If you ship out the
> page contents, the inserts are lost.
>
> It is tricky to program.  The one thing it works for is
> recycling the page through the output routine (without
> \@reinserts).
>
> The output triggering has to be rewritten to usually keep
> \holdinginserts=1,

If you are hooking into the output routine, it might make sense to
have \holdinginserts=10035 (or so), some special output penalty
associated with the output routine hook.  That convention leaves one
less possibility for collision if ids.

> until a page is ready to ship out (normal output), then temporarily
> set \holdinginserts=0 and recycle the page contents (\unvbox255
> etc).  Then the next invocation of the output routine can ship out
> the page.  That's what the answer in 3719 appears to do.  What is
> wrong with it?  I see a misuse of \outputpenalty, which may be the
> only problem.
>
> This probably doesn't belong on this list, so email me.

Guffaw.  Output routine design details in connection with LaTeX don't
belong on the LaTeX-L list?

--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum