User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1.50 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID:  <87k5nxw76i.fsf@buckbeak.hogwarts>
Date:         Sun, 2 Dec 2007 14:35:33 +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: Andreas Matthias <amat@KABSI.AT>
Subject: Misleading cs names?
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
Precedence: list
Status: R

Recently, the names of some control sequences were changed in svn.
Maybe this is a good time to think about other names as well.

* \int_set:Nn uses \numexpr to scan its second argument. Shouldn't
  it rather be called \int_set:Nx?

  The same would apply to \int_add:Nn, \int_sub:Nn, ...,
  \int_to_arabic:n,  ..., \int_compare:nNnTF, ... about most of the
  control sequence names in l3int. And l3skip.


* \quark_if_no_value gives the impression that this is a test
  `if a quark has no value'. But actually it is a test `if a token
  list is equal to \q_no_value'. Wouldn't \tlist_if_q_no_value be
  a better name?
  Same for: \quark_if_nil --> \tlist_if_q_nil


Ciao
Andreas