MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <jpqrt2$vk7$1@dough.gmane.org> <4FC13326.1060904@morningstar2.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Message-ID:  <CANQYN6x1+vdR1gFFHwvtRnX1o2nm-JKByie4tvV6U-eDsZHdUA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:         Sun, 27 May 2012 00:06:13 +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: Bruno Le Floch <blflatex@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: Should l3keys provide a key .initial:n?
To: LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de
In-Reply-To:  <4FC13326.1060904@morningstar2.co.uk>
Precedence: list
Status: R

On 5/26/12, Joseph Wright <joseph.wright@morningstar2.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26/05/2012 16:12, Marco Daniel wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> Today I noticed that there is no key .initial:n. This question popped up
>> during writing a small package. Whatever at the moment you have the
>> following possibilities to set a key-value-syntax with an initial value:
>> =======================================================================
>> %First approach:
>>
>> \keys_define:nn { module }
>>  {
>>   myoption .int_set:N  = \l_modul_myoption_int
>>  }
>> \keys_set:nn  { module }
>>  {
>>   myoption = 2
>>  }
>> \ProcessKeysOptions { module }
>>
>> =======================================================================
>> Second approach
>>
>> \keys_define:nn { module }
>>  {
>>   myoption .int_set:N  = \l_modul_myoption_int ,
>>   myoption .default:n  = 2
>>  }
>> \keys_set:nn  { module } { myoption }
>> \ProcessKeysOptions { module }
>>
>> =======================================================================
>
> Note that this are not equivalent when you consider the behaviour later
> on. In the second case, giving "myoption" is the same as "myoption = 2",
> but in the first case the two are distinct.
>
>> I suggest to define a new key .initial:n so that we have a third
>> approach:
>>
>> Second approach
>>
>> \keys_define:nn { module }
>>  {
>>   myoption .int_set:N  = \l_modul_myoption_int ,
>>   myoption .initial:n  = 2
>>  }
>> \ProcessKeysOptions { module }
>>
>> =======================================================================
>
> At one point we did have this. Checking back through the archive, I
> removed it as it did not seem to add anything to the two-stage process.
> However, that was not a 'strong' objection: I was simply trying to keep
> the number of properties down as far as possible. If this looks like a
> useful addition I've no problem adding it back in: anyone else have a view?
> --
> Joseph Wright
>

I'm no keys expert, but couldn't

  \int_set:Nn \l_modul_myoption_int { 2 }

do the job, at least in this case?

Cheers,
Bruno