> But yes, maybe an m4_divert_discard(diversion) would be nice shorthand for > that. Which brings up another weird semantic point of m4: m4_undivert > honors the current diversion, even during argument collection. So my > current patch for m4_divert_text vs. m4_expand isn't quite right: > > m4_expand([m4_divert_text([KILL], [m4_undivert(diversion)])]) > > should kill the text currently in diversion, but with the current state of > the patch, it routes it to the current diversion rather than KILL.
Yes, it's things like this (especially the diversion-during-argument-collection wart) that make me wonder if it *could* ever work at all. The expand-twice trick in my previous email seems worth pursuing... Paolo
