[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Packages/modules

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Packages/modules
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2020 12:50:06 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am Mittwoch, den 22.01.2020, 11:43 +0100 schrieb Urs Liska:
>> You mean that a package has to export every function or variable
>> separately? I think that would be good wrt self-documentation.
> This gave me another idea: How would it be if elements (functions,
> variables, whatever) exported by packages would have to be addressed
> through a package namespace:
> * scholarly.annotate exports \criticalRemark
> * this can't be used with \criticalRemark but (syntax of course up to
> the parser maintainer ;-) ) \scholarly.annotate.criticalRemark

The implementation of \x.y.z is not robust enough for that, it's a
nuisance, and judging from LaTeX experience, it does not seem to be
problem in practice.

> That way the global namespace would be less pollutable, and identical
> names in different packages wouldn't be an issue.
> A user can still do something like
>   criticalRemark = scholarly.annotate.criticalRemark
> as a local shorthand.

No, that would be equivalent to

criticalRemark = #'(scholarly annotate criticalRemark)

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]