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 p3JLMxXl020422 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:23:00 +0200 Received: (qmail 28358 invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2011 21:22:54 -0000 Delivered-To: GMX delivery to rainer.schoepf@gmx.net Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 19 Apr 2011 21:22:53 -0000 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (EHLO relay2.uni-heidelberg.de) [129.206.210.211] by mx0.gmx.net (mx069) with SMTP; 19 Apr 2011 23:22:53 +0200 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 p3JLKnNe022743 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:20:49 +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 p3JIr6d9004824; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:20:49 +0200 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with spool id 1254946 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:20:49 +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 p3JLKmRt023985 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:20:48 +0200 Received: from mail-gw0-f49.google.com (mail-gw0-f49.google.com [74.125.83.49]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p3JLKgxM022711 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:20:48 +0200 Received: by gwb1 with SMTP id 1so46028gwb.22 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.191.231 with SMTP id g67mr5628944yhn.67.1303248042516; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.147.136.4 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Apr 2011 14:20:42 -0700 (PDT) References: <4DA5C4E2.8090005@morningstar2.co.uk> <58AFBC3A-4209-4BC0-BB3A-5B14D6B5EFD8@gmail.com> <4DA727A9.2050903@morningstar2.co.uk> <19880.45400.677093.956908@morse.mittelbach-online.de> <4DADDE63.2010304@morningstar2.co.uk> <4DADFA0F.6080100@morningstar2.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Whitelist: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:20:42 -0400 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Bruno Le Floch Subject: Re: The nature of popping from an empty sequence To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de In-Reply-To: <4DADFA0F.6080100@morningstar2.co.uk> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (eXpurgate); Detail=5D7Q89H36p4yCuwxJv6KY0FCZRnwZ+130PK2kXkra7qtbjO0x42autolGxtq9Rd4nQSp/ RGhsAvk/0dS0uzkfwGLbp2wCnK+diHaLtN9om2S/0cJ30L9KMhUaXBo5P9miAJnVxbIjTfQauEwu sFfhERhTVhgaQFLZv0r5X1pd2A9/HhUPOXIlzM3qsbrNIcLeyfqIwyda2+szBz6JFHZ9g==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: 6714 >> Of course, the must be a token list, but the could be >> more restricted? > > I thought we were talking about sequences! (I suggest we finish that > discussion before moving on to other things.) Yes, I'll look at the seq code very soon. I was just pushing forward the natural continuation of Frank's question on an expandable \prop_if_in:NnTF test. If catcodes matter, then it is impossible to provide an expandable test. >> Here may be anything, but are rather well behaved. The >> key (sic) property of in my understanding is whether they >> differ or not, and detokenizing will not cause too many collisions? > > Within xtemplate, you'll find some places where we use the fact that the > keys do have catcodes to pull off some 'special effects'. Now, we also > remove spaces there, so spaces can also be used for said 'special > effects'. But such a change would require some alterations. Ok, so my assumption was wrong. But really, playing with catcodes is evil ;-). Regards, Bruno