Received: from mx0.gmx.net (mx0.gmx.net [213.165.64.100])
	by h1439878.stratoserver.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with SMTP id o5FDC1in025948
	for <rainer@rainer-schoepf.de>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:12:02 +0200
Received: (qmail 30689 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2010 13:11:56 -0000
Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2010 13:11:55 -0000
Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.100.212]
  by mx0.gmx.net (mx058) with SMTP; 15 Jun 2010 15:11:55 +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 o5FD9Avg030381
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:09:10 +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 o5FAcsgJ014223;
	Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:09:00 +0200
Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with
          spool id 438968 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 15 Jun
          2010 15:09:00 +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 o5FD90XW000560 for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>;
          Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:09:00 +0200
Received: from mail-pw0-f49.google.com (mail-pw0-f49.google.com
          [209.85.160.49]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with
          ESMTP id o5FD8kdu027420 for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>;
          Tue, 15 Jun 2010 15:08:50 +0200
Received: by pwj6 with SMTP id 6so3606337pwj.22 for
          <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:08:53 -0700
          (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.187.37 with SMTP id k37mr5740603waf.37.1276607333289; Tue,
          15 Jun 2010 06:08:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.102] (219-90-254-220.ip.adam.com.au [219.90.254.220]) by
          mx.google.com with ESMTPS id n32sm68166837wae.22.2010.06.15.06.08.51
          (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:08:52 -0700
          (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078)
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078)
X-Spam-Whitelist: <wspr81@gmail.com>
Message-ID:  <02DFADB9-2732-4230-8BFB-DB31CD4F503E@gmail.com>
Date:         Tue, 15 Jun 2010 22:38:46 +0930
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: Will Robertson <wspr81@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Fwd: ansinew.def makes @ other
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
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-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam);
 Detail=5D7Q89H36p4WX0t+AtsdW2ORvUlAfcdSIdQlIL3FTSFQDxQiodii41fjuqHQd8jelXgy3
 MmJ3btkX5rSzFn9hFaFIkN3F60IXoQiiC2/fgzDMa2Sr9P5SXQm9Ht9JSeZtUVRZ8Ll4+eY8TRy+
 si13Q==V1;
X-Resent-By: Forwarder <forwarder@gmx.net>
X-Resent-For: rainer.schoepf@gmx.net
X-Resent-To: rainer@rainer-schoepf.de
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 6334

Hi all,

Forwarded from c.t.t.; see below.
Any comments?

W

From: Christophe Jorssen <christophe.jorssen@libre.fr.invalid>
Subject: ansinew.def makes @ other

Hello all,

I'm surprised that ansinew.def (from the inputenc package), and probably 
other <inputenc>.def,  begins with a \makeatletter and ends with a 
\makeatother, loosing the catcode that @ had when entering the file.

Is there a reason for that? Wouldn't it better to save the catcode of @ 
and then restore it?

What do you think?

-- 
Christophe