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 p01JYOVk017958 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:34:26 +0100 Received: (qmail 15713 invoked by alias); 1 Jan 2011 19:34:19 -0000 Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 01 Jan 2011 19:34:19 -0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay2.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.210.211] by mx0.gmx.net (mx118) with SMTP; 01 Jan 2011 20:34:19 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p01JWe0d011524 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:32:40 +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 oBVN142h026065; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:32:34 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with spool id 771765 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:32:34 +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 p01JWYcm001643 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:32:34 +0100 Received: from anchor-post-1.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-1.mail.demon.net [195.173.77.132]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p01JWMaE011438 for ; Sat, 1 Jan 2011 20:32:26 +0100 Received: from morningstar2.demon.co.uk ([80.176.134.7] helo=palladium.local) by anchor-post-1.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.69) id 1PZ7Be-0005JZ-gx; Sat, 01 Jan 2011 19:32:22 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <4D1F6F9D.9020209@laposte.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <4D1F8145.2010308@morningstar2.co.uk> Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2011 19:32:21 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Joseph Wright Subject: Re: LaTeX3 and engines To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de In-Reply-To: <4D1F6F9D.9020209@laposte.net> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=5D7Q89H36p4U4jfdfC5HDevlx1X2sAZgAaLl3DbFfW0PXxL7WgvovMFXXSEPrACW/b9IW Qp+GhEViZlUW4mdBntgP1X8KwB5tjHCA/yxSZMu7BXBiPs3ujyaoi2xLHDqpg8dk65Dhpb3Lg0c1 iTjGg==V1; X-Resent-By: Forwarder X-Resent-For: rainer.schoepf@gmx.net X-Resent-To: rainer@rainer-schoepf.de Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 6482 On 01/01/2011 18:17, TeXWorld wrote: > Hello, > > What engines LaTeX3 is (and will be) designed to work with ? Like > LaTeX2e it will work with TeX, PDFTeX, XeTeX, LuaTeX, (Aleph...???), or > with a more limited list such as LuaTeX and XeTeX ? I'd like to know if > a decision has been taken and whether it has, I'd like to know why such > a decision. > > Thank you. > > Jack > Hello Jack, I think a bit of history is needed here. At first, the only primitives that expl3 *required* were those from TeX82 (Knuth's TeX). Some years ago now, it was decied to require the e-TeX extensions. These allow a number of functions to be carried out which are difficult or impossible otherwise. More recently, we have added \pdfstrcmp to the list of required primitives. This primitive allows expandable string-based comparisons, which are important for some low-level expl3 functions. So the requirement at present is a TeX engine which includes the e-TeX extensions and the functionality of \pdfstrcmp. This means the following engines should work: - pdfTeX v1.30 or later - XeTeX v0.9994 or later - LuaTeX v0.40 or later As LaTeX3 is far from ready, this may change in the future. However, the team have always been relatively cautious about engine requirements, and I expect that the above will remain as the minimum engine list for some time to come. (With LuaTeX, I'd strongly recommend a newer engine, given the pace of development of the binary. I'd *suggest* at least 0.60.) Joseph Wright