User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110902
            Thunderbird/6.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <B05A09B5-1199-466E-A812-679D76C15C73@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <4E76ECA9.7090809@morningstar2.co.uk>
Date:         Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:18:01 +0100
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: Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@MORNINGSTAR2.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: \msg_four_spaces:
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <B05A09B5-1199-466E-A812-679D76C15C73@gmail.com>
Precedence: list
Status: R

On 19/09/2011 07:32, Will Robertson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Am I mistaken or did \msg_four_spaces: once exist?
> (For when writing messages to the console output.)
> Writing
> 
>   \c_space_tl \c_space_tl \c_space_tl \c_space_tl
> 
> just doesn't have the same ring to it.
> (Happy calling it \msg_indent: or something else if that would be better?)
> 
> Or am I just crazy? I know we don't just want to add new functions at random all the time.

We did have \msg_space:, \msg_two_spaces: and \msg_four_spaces:. The
argument for getting rid of them in that form was that they were not
really functions, so using \c_space_tl seemed equally valid.

With the implementation we have now, you can use "\ " for a space, but
there is an argument for a semantic 'code indent'. So \msg_indent: would
seem to be reasonable.

Joseph