On May 14, 2013, at 10:02 AM, Hans Hagen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5/13/2013 11:19 PM, Stephan Hennig wrote: >> Am 29.04.2013 20:12, schrieb Stephan Hennig: >> >>> Taco, is this change intentional? It hasn't been announced in the >>> LuaTeX changelog. Do I have to adapt my code (the change breaks the >>> spelling package) or will LuaTeX be fixed? >> >> Ping! >> >> Referring to field 'command' instead 'cmd' works. I could test for the >> correct node field, but since node.has_field(n, 'cmd') returns true and >> node.has_field(n, 'command') returns false with LuaTeX 0.76, one needed >> to explicitly test for an error triggered by an assignment to either field. > >> Do I need to add such an ugly test to my code or may we expect this to >> be fixed before TL2013 is released? > > 'command' is the right key (so the has_field list has to be adapted)
Yes. As for fix: probably not before TL2013, as it is unlikely Karl wants to do another rebuild at this late stage. Best wishes, Taco
