Am 14.07.2011 um 09:39 schrieb Will Robertson: > (Sent from my phone.) > > On 13/07/2011, at 0:39, Taco Hoekwater <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Actually, that does not mean I think it is a good idea. The >> conceptual problem is that \XeTeXmathcodenum (and therefore >> also \Umathcodenum) can return a signed int to represent an >> unsigned value, with is pretty horrible. > > An alternate from the TeX point of view could be to add commands like > > \Umathclass > \Umathfam > \Umathslot > > to extract the relevant bits of information to pass to a subsequent > \Umathchardef, say.
and/or \Umathcode could be turned into a convert command that prints the class/family/code point combination in the format that \Umathchardef expects.
