Ulrike Fischer wrote: > Am Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:19:15 +0100 schrieb Taco Hoekwater: > >>> Not just right now, but at any time in the future: if a new primitive >>> \foo is introduced, any existing package that happens to use \foo is >>> potentially affected. >> This is the best argument ever -- for not developing luatex at all. >> >> Until version luatex 1.0, we reserve the right to make any change. >> Because if we were to promise not to remove old primitives and to >> avoid adding conflicting primitives, you get exactly what you have >> already: pdftex. Which isn't going away. > > Naturally luatex can add new primitives (and should do it) like > pdftex has done it. And you will never be able to avoid that such a > new primitive clash somehow. But nevertheless I think it would be > very useful if the names of the primitives would use an uniform > prefix -- even more as luatex is not stable and new primitives can > arise or disappear again. Prefixes like \pdf of pdftex and \XeTeX of > xetex create a simple namespace and enable package writers to avoid > _future_ conflicts with new primitives simply by not using the > prefix.
You do realise that you are argueing for the creation of \XeTeXsuppressfontnotfounderror and \LuaTeXsuppressfontnotfounderror instead of just the single new primitive \suppressfontnotfounderror that Jonathan and I came up with and implemented? Best wishes, Taco
