On 4/16/2013 11:10 AM, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
On 04/16/2013 11:05 AM, Marco Patzer wrote:
It doesn't make sense to use named parameters with
\define, since you explicitly pass the parameter*number* in
brackets. You cannot refer to a number by name. Well, you could
theoretically, but I'd strongly object.
Just out of curiosity: why would you object? In Lua, we have the syntax
function whatever(one, two, three)
do something with(one, two, three)
end
I'm not lobbying for define to have something similar, I just want to
point out that it would be in the spirit of convergence between ConTeXt
and Lua. It certainly isn't an urgent need, but having
\define[one,two,three]
wouldn't be absurd, now would it?
there is a commented blob that implements thinsg like this
\starttext
\define[2]\whatevera{#1+#2}
\whatevera{A}{B}
\define[me][too][2]\whateverb{#1+#2+#3+#4}
\whateverb[A]{B}{C}
\whateverb[A][B]{C}{D}
\define[alpha][beta][gamma][delta]\whateverc{#1+#2+#3+#4}
\whateverc[P][Q]
\stoptext
but it's just an old idea.
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
