Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18])
	by h1439878.stratoserver.net (8.14.2/8.14.2/Debian-2build1) with ESMTP id r67GrkW4001436
	for <rainer@rainer-schoepf.de>; Sun, 7 Jul 2013 18:53:47 +0200
Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de ([129.206.210.211]) by mx-ha.gmx.net
 (mxgmx102) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0LjcSC-1UKKXk3uJc-00bfOt for
 <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>; Sun, 07 Jul 2013 18:53:41 +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 r67Gp4he009915
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
	Sun, 7 Jul 2013 18:51:05 +0200
Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [127.0.0.1])
	by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r677AwVQ002298;
	Sun, 7 Jul 2013 18:51:01 +0200
Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 16.0) with
          spool id 10258597 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jul
          2013 18:51:01 +0200
Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de
          [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with
          ESMTP id r67Gf1g4027369 for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>;
          Sun, 7 Jul 2013 18:41:01 +0200
Received: from mail-ee0-f50.google.com (mail-ee0-f50.google.com [74.125.83.50])
          by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id
          r67GenSo022136 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128
          verify=FAIL) for <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>; Sun, 7 Jul
          2013 18:40:52 +0200
Received: by mail-ee0-f50.google.com with SMTP id d49so2292415eek.23 for
          <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de>; Sun, 07 Jul 2013 09:40:49 -0700
          (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.15.41.196 with SMTP id s44mr21032636eev.138.1373215249251;
            Sun, 07 Jul 2013 09:40:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from palladium.home
          (host86-155-212-104.range86-155.btcentralplus.com. [86.155.212.104])
          by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
          i2sm34463269eeu.4.2013.07.07.09.40.47 for
          <LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de> (version=TLSv1
          cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 07 Jul 2013 09:40:48
          -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0)
            Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <51D9914A.5090606@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <51D9972E.9000109@mada-nada.de>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <51D99A0E.8050906@morningstar2.co.uk>
Date:         Sun, 7 Jul 2013 17:40:46 +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: Function renaming: \<thing>_case:nnn to \<thing>_case:nnF
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <51D9972E.9000109@mada-nada.de>
Precedence: list
List-Help: <http://listserv.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=LATEX-L>,
           <mailto:LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE?body=INFO%20LATEX-L>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:LATEX-L-unsubscribe-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:LATEX-L-subscribe-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Owner: <mailto:LATEX-L-request@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
List-Archive: <http://listserv.uni-heidelberg.de/cgi-bin/wa?LIST=LATEX-L>
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
X-GMX-Antispam: 0 (Mail was not recognized as spam); Detail=V3;
X-GMX-Antivirus: 0 (no virus found)
X-UI-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:QbnOceVSY/Y=:i16SLyVNZr1aQtXatCQDCR
 z0TgSY476B1hF8VteIGB1qsTEAhEUo+tBaW/eH+EixqgHEWARVkm9L+XhIB6L8EUzZrLfbb
 kAkJK42e2iCyBfxJ+xIGAPuHj3wzsdybF3ZmgiVC578w+0HUvGJRdYzn/uaWAruCjAFlJ/s
 luXiG9fk0VSKc9ElVgi026tb5hbkEeihYTDENCzQAL9kXw9k3ydmNKYlyIZehaQ0g3hCw3h
 0ayZR9CPJWQSN4aOK+597IO/U88cpMKK/G+OGqiD0wkdKlSot/EMfCgHC7GqevItnduasax
 zK/S9TXzmGUWpLFYzoHk5whV3sFgeVx3R9LE10srELGgX/UlILDZArUUpON/YHL4AYoFDZp
 Vdq9lF3QJvfecu7oOCVedNRCLlN4bMd5fv/g0ry8NWenkkbIt+jrcS3Pz/4Bnw5bihygf5b
 j/mcojq3y9r67eepEjYoeTXyokOLnl/2Yzu0B/9PZQFMC/1FRxxvDg70+L+3yGykF+M1Bil
 nGVmcP/ZcOwCE2hJoIQifWzPhzbO/Jaa8+tQYfFbQMWf3fikJyhphKliX1vOOVQhrznz782
 4/SyxGPTNgFAlOLV4jwhqIIkG8A2hqZoOp/qSj+95krkS70rE5WeFPw9CBOaPRSIoiY2yFg
 TZXEhJvLOGVX6gnNlHG82SAc179OFeCve1wTZaGZlvkfeKJG+BEqSsGhkdOuRLy53pMwpDN
 2VIpuuIvx+F3IQJrJbeVv9FcXC/zzPp5n5jZt/3zxRxF4A3rxRIxKeftdd0a0cbGiX2MGnz
 Bwq0aqVCoku2Tgi8PqNNmdtimG0pEIG9yb4gW15Jy457Tsq8r221kGYdk6lSFz/g07QTKuj
 tvyALF2fSh7exa+NmDHaLx6c5O44MxjFyE3faTuHcFEJUdJrfulh5ZVHOHVqauFF5e4tPy2
 yrveogS375KXVww1H1xnxlA1SAuHN2DFJFeLWk96xmD6fvDdVqlYIpP/ZrIEK2LSghzgMAY
 mYO9BPPh7SVjR99etgGfjQGnB1NiyU/EDm8MMF8ExWkWGWJkXsJGNWn9wIxotjFTpap7X/R
 EkMKDFA9mnRVAWER5fr1xo4EEH90X/mzCG1xilrtUJ9xcqMdABoY5stPpFd/ZtJjX1JEC6G
 ys2rpRlVnsdVRqJBJYQ2qRkWaFx+9LGwWKvZTLaSioX8u8MbMW+mi96am/zeh0NTl5ECdg4
 jkP3f9pWdE74V2O0OOyMnXZwQURovVOzCUeV2R7AP7p0yUlk0uKhI01BhkeZAMAEAtCt001
 /xJEJWG3oH254MBU13V2rGrzK7y+c0DSgthX1YFZtOztbHU/XU/XGuXguYqyFXuKJDky69b
 SdHQpBIYLGSVdY9Uizv61jHysdy/nZBIuqD/lj3Qktus8FDglPMUuudXIk2oLJt2hYssRy8
 ucgqm7VBzRgPuuL+OzhDsIW/Jjc+w9YJ39wHeftWAf0r2rDJ1faHK4jhIJHmegGtQdaOzbN
 QV1Jvx3L/bzEnl1OWiq0mFiTzKsrhdjBWHeTaaIaZ1ITLBIUidaCMzRX4I1NGkk0a+EM8jz
 HrPl87SlaYPJw+nIylYgYx3zOXU7RkLv1cgZADi08En2vhRJh+C1666/Z4y5zewVlkoBfsT
 9SK9YWQVm
X-UI-Loop:V01:3oNI063MwuU=:FSprg4wkNxNlIdj09p7B0WrdPcLkEyCtlxLMN7SSXDk=
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 7214

On 07/07/2013 17:28, Marco Daniel wrote:
>> The team intend to modify the existing \<thing>_case:nnn functions,
>> renaming the last argument as 'F'. This reflects the fact that this
>> final argument is used only when the test case (<thing>-dependent) is
>> logically false, and follows the approach used elsewhere.
> I think it's not a good decision. The argument specifier F implies for
> me that there is also a true part (T). So I would prefer to use
> \<thing>_case:nnn.

This has already been raised internally by members of the team :-) The
addition of \<thing>_case:nnTF may happen, as it covers the 'if there is
a hit, always do ...' situation without code duplication.

>>   At the same
>> time, we intend to introduce \<thing>_case:nn, where there is no false
>> branch (i.e. where 'do nothing' is the appropriate action).
>>
> I think this is a good decision.

This is actually what prompted us to look at this.

> I hope it's ok to post my thoughts here.
> 
> Best regards
> Marco

The point of having a public list :-)
-- 
Joseph Wright