Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1081)
References: <4C967C9B.5010706@gmx.de>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <71ED7A5B-DE11-45D9-9785-95A1DC795080@gmail.com>
Date:         Mon, 20 Sep 2010 09:27:10 +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: Re: boolean expressions in ExplSyntaxNames
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <4C967C9B.5010706@gmx.de>
Precedence: list
Status: R

On 20/09/2010, at 6:41 AM, Arno Trautmann wrote:

> \ExplSyntaxNamesOn
> \bool_if_p:n{
> \intexpr_compare_p:n {2=3} ||
> \intexpr_compare_p:n {4=4}
> }
> \ExplSyntaxNamesOff
> 
> \end{document}
> 
> In SyntaxNames, I get the error
> 
> ! Use of \bool_|_0:w doesn't match its definition.
> <argument>  \intexpr_compare_p:n {2=3} ||
>                                          \intexpr_compare_p:n {4=4}
> l.16 }
> 
> The use of && is successfull in both cases, though. I guess this is
> because the line in ExplSyntax:
> 
> \tex_catcode:D 124=11 \tex_relax:D % vertical bar, other
> 
> is missing in SyntaxNames.
> So is it intended that boolean expressions cannot be fully evaluated in
> SyntaxNames? Or didn’t anybody have requested this yet?


I'd like to hear the opinions of the others; I guess this is an edge case to using SyntaxNames. Ideally, perhaps, we should make \bool_if:n more robust so the catcode of | isn't as critical.


-- Will