Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:43, jfbu <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:37, David Carlisle <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> On 15 October 2015 at 18:35, jfbu <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Joseph >>> >>> Le 15 oct. 2015 à 19:29, Joseph Wright <[email protected]> a >>> écrit : >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Hello Jean-François, >>>> >>>> The 'real' names of the primitives have always been just \Umath... For >>>> some time they've been enabled with the "luatex" prefix.. The LaTeX team >>>> have recently taken a more 'active' interest in directly supporting >>>> LuaTeX (and XeTeX) by modifying latex.ltx to 'know' about these engines. >>>> As part of that process, we've revised the approach to the newer >>>> primitives and dropped the prefix 'out of the box'. >>>> >>>> For code that needs to work both with older (pre 2015/10/01) and newer >>>> (2015/10/01 onward) kernel releases, adding >>>> >>>> \directlua{ >>>> tex.enableprimitives("luatex", tex.extraprimitives("Umath")) >>>> } >>>> >>>> (for just the Umath set) will do the job. Alternatively, if the code in >>>> your package gets modified to drop the prefix then >>>> >>>> \directlua{ >>>> tex.enableprimitives("", tex.extraprimitives("Umath")) >>>> } >>>> >>>> will ensure that the 'natural' names are available with older kernel >>>> releases. >>> >>> >>> OK, let's see if I get you right: I remove from mathastext.sty >>> all "luatex" prefixes, but also I need to add >>> >>> \directlua{ >>> tex.enableprimitives("", tex.extraprimitives("Umath")) >>> } >>> >>> to mathastext.sty if it detects luatex, >>> >>> so as to be sure the new version of the package will work also >>> with older LaTeX releases ? >>> >>> is that right ? >>> >>> best, >>> >>> Jean-François >> >> >> That works in general for primitives that were previously prefixed >> \luatex... but the \Umath... names are special in that they were >> previously available both prefixed and not prefixed, so you can just >> use the unprefixed ones. >> > > Hi David, > > ok, this is very clear, thanks, sorry if I have one last question does > "previously available" mean "all the way back to 2011" ? > > I can't test it on my laptop which only has TeXLive 2012 and later, > and I would like not to break installations as far back as 2011, > > best > > Jean-François
Hi David/Joseph, [ I apologize to the list, perhaps I should move this discussion to a LaTeX list ] sorry again, but texdoc ltnews did not give me the following info: should I also remove the "xetex" prefixes and use "\Umathchardef" also under XeLaTeX ? from texdoc xetex, the primitives are there only with "U" prefix. best, Jean-François
