Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:10:50 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mAK8AmeU016427 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:10:49 +0100 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 mAK86VGV025784 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:06:31 +0100 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 mAJN2xWc023750; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:06:25 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 157078 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:06:25 +0100 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 mAK86ODM028548 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:06:24 +0100 Received: from mailgate5.uea.ac.uk (mailgate5.uea.ac.uk [139.222.130.185]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mAK86BDn005954 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 09:06:16 +0100 Received: from [139.222.128.187] (helo=ueams04.uea.ac.uk) by mailgate5.uea.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1L34YC-0004Dp-5e for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:06:08 +0000 Received: from [139.222.202.18] by ueams04.uea.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1L34YC-0007ta-4u for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:06:08 +0000 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <27990a880811191758x2a29ecb4m33d2dcead1f32093@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <49251A70.1020308@morningstar2.co.uk> Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:06:08 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Joseph Wright Subject: Re: \exp_after:NN To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: <27990a880811191758x2a29ecb4m33d2dcead1f32093@mail.gmail.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: 20 Nov 2008 08:10:51.0108 (UTC) FILETIME=[80883240:01C94AE7] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5447 Will Robertson wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:00 AM, Joseph Wright > wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I've been writing a talk about LaTeX3, and something struck me. Why is it >> \exp_after:NN and no \exp_after:NO? > > Or even \exp_args:NO, which saves us a char. (In fact, we could drop > the "s" in all of the \exp_args functions and save us another...) True, \exp_args:NO makes sense. I think that the "s" is handy in some of the cases where more than one argument is altered, so for the sake of one character I'd leave it alone. > I guess \exp_after:NN is an edge-case of the naming scheme. In fact, > it should probably be called \exp_after:ww because in a case like > this: > \foo\expandafter{\bar} > the opening brace doesn't really qualify as a "N" type argument. In the main, with all of the \exp_args functions the average programmer should only need \exp_after:NN for the simple case of getting past a macro, not another token. In general, it seems that the :w functions tend to be ones where there is a better alternative for most scenarios. So I'd be wary of using :ww here. Joseph -- Joseph Wright Tel. 01604 810094 Morning Star Mobile 07974 148180 2 Dowthorpe End Earls Barton Northants NN6 0NH