Will Robertson wrote:
I'm not suggesting this seriously, but you could prefix new primitives
with chars that are usually "other" to dramatically lower the chances
of a clash. E.g., \^scantextokens, \^directlua, and whatever.
each macro package has its own usage of prefixes so that would not solve
the problem; of course one can remap primitives quite early after
loading so
\let\^scantextokens\scantextokens
and when in macro package xyz this is agreed upon it also avoids
discussions at the engine dev level
also, prefixing with \...@reserved@scantextokens or whatever is rather safe
too (and efficient)
any namespace switching mechanism would bring its own problems (mixed
namespaces, more code, clashes too); it's all about managaging code and
the only way out there is clear rules forusers that want to extend a
macro package
Actual known clashes are a different issue, and we do try quite hard
to avoid such names: for example, luatex will never get \begin as a
new primitive.
Are you aware, Karl, of any namespace collisions that have already
occured? I do understand your concern, but I imagine that only a very
small number of old documents will be affected by the LuaTeX primitives.
well, i myself ran into it several times -)
also, users redefining primitives are out of anyones control -)
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
