References: <85wsoeto1k.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
            <18385.42387.268037.81145@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
            <85skz2rzpg.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
            <18385.47367.235186.436845@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
            <854pbiru5z.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
            <i7hcfh2rmf.fsf_-_@hilbert.math.albany.edu>
            <18386.50332.562898.876072@morse.mittelbach-online.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Message-ID:  <85myp9no2m.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
Date:         Sat, 8 Mar 2008 18:05:37 +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: Unclosed groups -- Was: Re: A really, really bad bug.
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <18386.50332.562898.876072@morse.mittelbach-online.de> (Frank
              Mittelbach's message of "Sat, 8 Mar 2008 17:53:48 +0100")
Precedence: list
Status: R

Frank Mittelbach <frank.mittelbach@LATEX-PROJECT.ORG> writes:

> William,
>
>  > If I may be permitted to make a remark from the sidelines:
>  > 
>  > > I don't like this solution since it would still trigger save stack
>  > > overflow when there is an unclosed group at the end of the document.
>  > >
>  > > I quite prefer the usual warning about an open group at the end of
>  > > document over having a save stack capacity overflow triggered.
>  > 
>  > Unclosed groups are likely obstacles for translation of LaTeX to
>  > formats like the usual tex4ht targets.
>
> I don't think that David meant that an unclosed group should be
> ignored, but that it is better to to get "document ended while group
> xyz open" than to bomb with a stack overflow (for the same reason but
> harder to understand).

Yes.  I think the change of \@testdef I proposed is the sanest course,
even though it means having to cater for Babel separately.  Johannes,
are you reading this?  What are our chances to more or less do this
change synchronously?  My gut feeling is that we should really get Babel
into the LaTeX SVN, then change both things with a single commit.  And
that this should happen before we release LaTeX to TeXlive2008.

But in any case, this should happen at the same point of time in Babel
and LaTeX.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum