Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
	 Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:34:52 +0200
Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m88BYl4D016715
	for <rainer.schoepf@PROTEOSYS.COM>; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:34:48 +0200
Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94])
	by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m88BVrBo002598
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:31:54 +0200
Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m87M1Dp8004931;
	Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:31:53 +0200
Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with
          spool id 20924 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 8 Sep
          2008 13:31:53 +0200
Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de
          [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with
          ESMTP id m88BVrdY031998 for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>;
          Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:31:53 +0200
Received: from gv-out-0910.google.com (gv-out-0910.google.com [216.239.58.184])
          by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id
          m88BVlhR009167 for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>; Mon, 8 Sep
          2008 13:31:51 +0200
Received: by gv-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id n29so194994gve.38 for
          <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>; Mon, 08 Sep 2008 04:31:44 -0700
          (PDT)
Received: by 10.210.10.8 with SMTP id 8mr4400085ebj.138.1220873504039; Mon, 08
          Sep 2008 04:31:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.210.74.19 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Sep 2008 04:31:43 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <48C443A3.4040405@morningstar2.co.uk>
Message-ID:  <859ec5630809080431g1c5b01d9r742a738ac28791d4@mail.gmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 8 Sep 2008 13:31:43 +0200
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: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Morten_H=F8gholm?= <morten.hoegholm@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Counts and counters/\clist_map_break:w
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <48C443A3.4040405@morningstar2.co.uk>
Precedence: list
List-Help: <http://listserv.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=LATEX-L>,
           <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE?body=INFO%20LATEX-L>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:LATEX-L-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:LATEX-L-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Owner: <mailto:LATEX-L-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Archive: <http://listserv.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=LATEX-L>
X-ProteoSys-SPAM-Score: -2.599 () BAYES_00
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 213.139.130.197
Return-Path: owner-latex-l@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Sep 2008 11:34:52.0776 (UTC) FILETIME=[E8FABE80:01C911A6]
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 5234

On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Joseph Wright
<joseph.wright@morningstar2.co.uk> wrote:

> Yet more questions.

Good! :-)

> Question 1. The various counter-creation macros in expl3 work like
> \newcount.  There doesn't seem to be anything like \newcounter, for
> creating something with a user-facing \the<counter>.  Should counters
> that go near the user stick with \newcounter for the moment, or should
> one define \c@<counter> and \the<counter> "by hand" so that things look
> the same for the user?  I guess this is partly a philosophical question!

LaTeX counters (\newcounter) are document level. The expl3 counters
are so far low-level only. I think it is important that you write your
low-level code separate from the user interface, e.g., use xparse or
similar to map between document usage and low-level.

> Question 2. Why is \clist_map_break:w "weird"?  It doesn't take an
> argument from a use point of view, so I'd have expected \clist_map_break:.

I think the original reasoning was that the user had to know exactly
where it could be used (\if level) but that of course applies to many
things... I recently added (but did not yet check in I think) two
variant forms, namely, as you say, \clist_map_break: and also
\clist_map_break:n. The latter will carry an argument to the end of
the loop, typically something involving the last value found. Same for
other loop types. The l3prg case-switches use something like this.

> Do tell me to stop if I'm asking too much!

Not at all. The reason expl3 has grown so much over the past years is
because it was discussed and used. So keep 'em coming!
-- 
Morten