On 5 March 2009 Taco Hoekwater wrote:

 > 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?

Hi Taco,
great to hear that you are discussing these things with Jonathan!
Yes, I think that two primitives in different engines, which do exactly
the same thing, should have the same name.

Regarding namespaces: It's a good idea at first glance.  But I don't
think there is any need to be concerned about macro packages people
write in the future.  Macro writers have to read the specifications
anyway.  They have to read the TeXbook if they want to support Knuth's
tex, they have to read the pdfTeX manual if they want to support
pdftex, and they have to read the LuaTeX manual if they want to support
Luatex.  Same for e-TeX, XeTeX, Omega, and derivates.

Hans already explained why new primitives don't break old macro
packages.  So, where is the problem?

Regards,
  Reinhard

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reinhard Kotucha                                      Phone: +49-511-3373112
Marschnerstr. 25
D-30167 Hannover                              mailto:[email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to