On 4/15/2013 4:21 PM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
Am 15.04.2013 um 16:12 schrieb Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl:
On 4/15/2013 4:07 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
I don't think named parameters are possible with \define, but maybe
I'm mistaken.
just use suffix .mkvi or put % macros=mkvi at the top of your
On 2013–04–16 Hans Hagen wrote:
Marco tries to do something like
\define[3]\Test{#one#two#three}
which doesn’t work.
hm, ok, do \define is not mkvi then ... too messy to catch that one too
No need to bother with that. I was just pointing out the differences
between \def and \define
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
On 2013–04–16 Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
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
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
Since the question has been raised about understanding \define, etc.
indeed some use remains a bit unclear (to me).
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:34:48 +0200
Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote:
there is a commented blob that implements thinsg like this
\starttext
\define[2]\whatevera{#1+#2}
On 4/16/2013 1:14 PM, Alan BRASLAU wrote:
Since the question has been raised about understanding \define, etc.
indeed some use remains a bit unclear (to me).
On Tue, 16 Apr 2013 12:34:48 +0200
Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl wrote:
there is a commented blob that implements thinsg like this
On 4/16/2013 12:11 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
On 2013–04–16 Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
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
In plain TeX, we always use \def for creating a new macro, but in ConTeXt,
sometimes it won't work, especially when making own chapter titles. The \def
can produce the error message like this : Argument of \... has an extra }.
\define in ConTeXt can solve this problem. What's the difference
Am 15.04.2013 um 15:47 schrieb Tim Li timli2...@outlook.com:
In plain TeX, we always use \def for creating a new macro, but in ConTeXt,
sometimes it won't work, especially when making own chapter titles. The \def
can produce the error message like this : Argument of \... has an extra }.
On 2013–04–15 Tim Li wrote:
What's the difference between \def and \define?
\define is basically the same as \unexpanded\def. It uses a slightly
different syntax for specifying optional arguments:
\define[3]\foo{First: #1, Second: #2, Third: #3}
\unexpanded\def\foo#1#2#3{First: #1, Second:
On 4/15/2013 4:07 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
I don't think named parameters are possible with \define, but maybe
I'm mistaken.
just use suffix .mkvi or put % macros=mkvi at the top of your file
-
Am 15.04.2013 um 16:12 schrieb Hans Hagen pra...@wxs.nl:
On 4/15/2013 4:07 PM, Marco Patzer wrote:
I don't think named parameters are possible with \define, but maybe
I'm mistaken.
just use suffix .mkvi or put % macros=mkvi at the top of your file
Marco tries to do something like
On 2013–04–15 Hans Hagen wrote:
I don't think named parameters are possible with \define, but maybe
I'm mistaken.
just use suffix .mkvi or put % macros=mkvi at the top of your file
That's how to enable named parameters for \def. I was talking about
\define. The arguments are provided as a
14 matches
Mail list logo
