On 8/24/2013 2:31 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
On 2013–08–24 Hans Hagen wrote:
startplaincompatibity ;
label(first, origin);
pair laboff.foo ; laboff.foo := (.5,-1) ;
labxf.foo := labyf.foo := 1 ;
label.foo(second, origin);
stopplaincompatibity ;
On 2013–08–24 Hans Hagen wrote:
startplaincompatibity ;
label(first, origin);
pair laboff.foo ; laboff.foo := (.5,-1) ;
labxf.foo := labyf.foo := 1 ;
label.foo(second, origin);
stopplaincompatibity ;
Brilliant! Thanks a lot. A few things:
1)
Hi,
what is the reason the label direction prefix variables (rt, bot,
llft, etc.) are prefixed with mpfun_ in MkIV (mp-mlib.mpiv)? When
new directional prefixes are being defined it fails when mplib is
used unless the mpfun_ prefix is added. And likewise, code using the
mpfun_ prefix fails on
On 8/23/2013 11:42 AM, Marco Patzer wrote:
Hi,
what is the reason the label direction prefix variables (rt, bot,
llft, etc.) are prefixed with mpfun_ in MkIV (mp-mlib.mpiv)? When
new directional prefixes are being defined it fails when mplib is
used unless the mpfun_ prefix is added. And
On 2013–08–23 Hans Hagen wrote:
Is this prefix required? It breaks old code and required a branch in
every new project. And I don't really see a reason for this
incompatibility. Here is an example defining a new direction “foo”:
The MpIV code has namespace protection. Why run traditional in
On 8/23/2013 3:14 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
On 2013–08–23 Hans Hagen wrote:
Is this prefix required? It breaks old code and required a branch in
every new project. And I don't really see a reason for this
incompatibility. Here is an example defining a new direction “foo”:
The MpIV code has
