On 5/28/13 6:11pm, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
You really could have simply mentioned you were using tex.hashtokens()
from the LuaTeX library. "Hash token" is not part of the standard TeX
vocabulary, but "token" is, with a different meaning.
As I said, I didn't post to TeX but to Lua because I used LuaLaTeX, and
the subject of this post was about Hash tokens. I thought it was a
LuaTeX feature, not a TeX one (no "\" in any token, so I didn't
recognize TeX except for the names which are the same, except for "\"),
and I thought it was clear. So, again as I said, I was wrong, I wasn't
clear.
OK, but you do have the source code here: why refuse to use it?
Where did I ever refuse to use it? I said I would get myself the code
and the TeX book.
Because it's new. I thought of it as an escaping in C, a sort, let's
say this, of protection of the next character, as in \% (the same
way in C for \").
That's understandable, but TeX's control sequence mechanism is
different from escaping. A control sequence is anything starting with a
character having category code 0 -- that character is usually \, but can
actually be anything -- and that translates to something else during
macro expansion. And you can even make \ a part of a control sequence's
name, if you want, but that's a little bit convoluted (and not very
useful).
I understand now.
And I did leave several parts out, read the TeXbook for the full story.
Yes, I am reading it.
Yes, I knew that once opened the hash file with an hex editor. I
knew TeX didn't have support for unicode, and I thought that
lualatex translated into TeX, which produced an output. So a unicode
string was unexpected, and I thought I messed up with my dump code.
That's another misconception, I'm afraid. LuaTeX doesn't translate to
TeX, it is an extension of TeX. It augments the original code base with
many new features -- including, obviously, Lua -- and its input and
output are in UTF-8 (by default).
(And the code base has been converted from Pascal to C, etc., etc.,
there are many subtopics to that aspect.)
A common misconception that I've fallen into.
Pardon me, but I'm used to write code in C, assembly, C++, or
whatever other programming language (mainly those three, in that
order). TeX is very, very different.
Yes, and it is a programming language too (specifically, a macro
language). It would be useful if you would stop resisting the notion.
Where did I resist? I accept the notion, and I am just trying to explain
*WHY* I thought otherwise. It's not that I am saying that I was right.
Far more interesting are the different commands defined by LaTeX when
\label is called, look for "ltxref.dtx" in latex.ltx. The letter "r"
(in \r@something) is introduced in a macro called \newlabel (line 3881
of my copy of latex.ltx), and "@" in \@newl@bel, one line above it.
That is awesome, I now have a place to start!
I still don't see what's exciting about these few macros, but if it
makes you happy ...
I start walking, then I run. Since I don't know for instance where the
equivalent of "main()" is in the LaTeX code, you provided me a
Anyway, at some point there *is* a static version of a code
somewhere, otherwise there would be no output.
I'm not sure that makes sense, but let's just leave it at that for the
time being.
There is a static version because somewhere the codes are in RAM,
somewhere the final version of a LaTeX command can be found.
Yes, I am biased by
my job and education, but I find hard to grasp the opposition to
this approach.
I can't believe I'm reading that. *You* are the one coming towards
TeX with a huge bias and a host of misconceptions, and you're talking
about opposition to your approach on *our* part? You freely admit that
you don't understand the way a source file is structured, and you want
us to help you analyse a file that you've produced according to your own
taste, without even showing us what the input was? You won't tell us
your name, and use a pseudonym that, when you're in the position of a
student, is at best snooty? If it wasn't for our expertise, your
approach wouldn't have led you anywhere.
I never asked to analyze a file, reread my post. I asked about specific
tokens.
I am quite sure of my knowledge to recognize that I am not able to make
it on my own.
So, since I recognize my bias, I asked for something that in the
programming language community is clear. If I have a function in C
called "main()" how will this be translated? Well, you'll end up with a
symbol "_main". If you don't see why this connection makes sense... but
anyway, if you read my posts with calm and zen, you will see that I
always said "I was wrong".
Should I flog myself for being wrong? It's the only way to improve.
Again, I never had an attitude of someone saying "you pricks don't know
s*it and I do LOL". If you ever see in one of my posts that, I didn't do
that *INTENTIONALLY*.
Sensei my *ss.
And that's very mature.
I understand you know everything on every topic, and don't need to ask
questions to those who know more than you. Well, I am sorry I am not
skilled on these matters, that's why I asked.
A "RTFM" attitude won't make you any more respected.
