Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:27:43 +0200 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m89GRcaB009588 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:27:39 +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 m89GMlDH016670 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:22:47 +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 m88M19nK015958; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:22:46 +0200 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 28367 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:22:46 +0200 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id m89GMkZl004140 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:22:46 +0200 Received: from mailgate5.uea.ac.uk (mailgate5.uea.ac.uk [139.222.130.185]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m89GMWBq016289 for ; Tue, 9 Sep 2008 18:22:35 +0200 Received: from [139.222.128.187] (helo=ueams04.uea.ac.uk) by mailgate5.uea.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Kd5z5-0007RE-Vv for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:22:32 +0100 Received: from [139.222.200.202] by ueams04.uea.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Kd5z5-0006Dv-TX for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:22:31 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Windows/20080708) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8D5403E89293A448A409DDDD1531CE1801951A53@defrm202.emea.corp.eds.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <48C6A2C3.7030203@morningstar2.co.uk> Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 17:22:27 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Joseph Wright Subject: Re: def:NNn --- was tlp type To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: <8D5403E89293A448A409DDDD1531CE1801951A53@defrm202.emea.corp.eds.com> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: 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: 09 Sep 2008 16:27:43.0883 (UTC) FILETIME=[FC96A5B0:01C91298] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5258 Mittelbach, Frank wrote: > yeah ... and I would claim that this urge of you goes in completely the wrong direction :-) Okay, I see where this comes from. > my take is that the recent addition of \def:NNn and firends was already a mistake and should be reverted. These functions provide something which at the expl3 level isn't really needed. What is gained from having the alternative between > > \def:Npn #1#2#3 {...} > > and > > \def:NNn 3 {...} > > the former is much more general (and on expl3 level that generality is sometimes needed), I would claim it is easier to read as the # signs stand out better than a simple "3". I'll revise what I have, in that case. I'm getting the hang of this, honestly! > it is a bit like the newcount newcounter discussion yeaterday ... \def:NNn is kind of an attempt to carry more or less "user-level" functions into the language and they don't belong there On the counter discussion, you'll see (in xnotes2bib) I've stuck with the low-level variant but needing to make it available to the user. I hope this is the right idea. As I've said, I'm asking to understand things. Probably a re-spin of xnotes2bib today or tomorrow, with this new information on board. -- Joseph Wright