Lines: 25
References: <C58398B6-8915-458C-AF38-F3C82F9342B2@gmail.com>                   
            <4E4FF538.7070601@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <9788A2B7-3E8F-4D2C-A52E-10999BCB59FA@gmail.com>
            <4E516DF2.4040002@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <104nbkj0nr84x.dlg@nililand.de>
            <4E523217.2080408@morningstar2.co.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.41de
Message-ID:  <cybpko27uiip.dlg@nililand.de>
Date:         Mon, 22 Aug 2011 14:28:35 +0200
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: Ulrike Fischer <news3@NILILAND.DE>
Subject: Re: couple of l3keys notes
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
Precedence: list
Status: R

Am Mon, 22 Aug 2011 11:40:23 +0100 schrieb Joseph Wright:


> Now while this is okay, the point I guess is that a cleaner interface is
> desirable. One simple approach would be to define \keys_set_known:nn,
> which does the same as \keys_set:nn but (a) raises no error for unknown
> keys and (b) stores unknowns in some defined place. This might lead to
> 
>   \keys_set_known:nn { chess / init } {#1}
>   \keys_set_known:nV { chess / set } \l_keys_unknown_keyvals_clist
>   \keys_set:nV { chess / fill } \l_keys_unknown_keyvals_clist
> 
> (I'm imagining \l_keys_unknown_keyvals_clist contains the keys plus
> values, with \l_keys_unknown_keys_clist just containing the key names.)
> 
> An obvious question then is whether to provide an 'internal' recycle,
> similar to \setrmkeys, or just to provide the list as a variable and
> leave it to the programmer to do the recycling.

I think I would prefer a list, it's more flexible (and easier to
inspect if something goes wrong). 


-- 
Ulrike Fischer