I'll take a look at it. Thank you a lot, Taco.
Regards,
Jairo :)
El lun., 29 de jun. de 2020 a la(s) 05:36, Taco Hoekwater (
t...@elvenkind.com) escribió:
> Hi,
>
> Oversimplifying:
>
> TeX (and derivatives like luatex) read the input file as a list of
> operators with optional suffix
On 6/29/2020 3:48 PM, Jairo A. del Rio wrote:
|Oh, I was just asking about
luatexbase.add_to_callback("process_input_buffer", blabla, "blabla" )|
|
|
|and
|
|
luatexbase.remove_from_callback("process_input_buffer", "blabla" )
|
We always had such things but I never advertise their usage.
Oh, I was just asking about
luatexbase.add_to_callback("process_input_buffer", blabla, "blabla" )
and
luatexbase.remove_from_callback("process_input_buffer", "blabla" )
LuaLaTeX users do that way and I want to be sure it won't interfere
with ConTeXt way of doing things so I can play with the
On 6/29/2020 12:21 PM, Jairo A. del Rio wrote:
Wouldn't it be slow for larger documents? I will try anyway. By the way,
I've seen Lua(La)TeX users recurring to callbacks (process input buffer)
to make string replacements and I've done so myself sometimes. Does
ConTeXt do preprocessing the same
On 6/29/2020 1:06 PM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Sorry, that was a bit too much oversimplification:
On 29 Jun 2020, at 12:36, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
In math mode, there *is* an expression state maintained, and that is why \over
and \atop work.
Actually (still oversimplifying), the found
Sorry, that was a bit too much oversimplification:
> On 29 Jun 2020, at 12:36, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>
> In math mode, there *is* an expression state maintained, and that is why
> \over and \atop work.
Actually (still oversimplifying), the found commands are saved in a temporary
list,
that
Hi,
Oversimplifying:
TeX (and derivatives like luatex) read the input file as a list of operators
with optional suffix arguments.
In normal (text) mode, there is no expression state maintained except inside
the handling of such optional arguments.
It follows that, if there is a top-level
Wouldn't it be slow for larger documents? I will try anyway. By the way,
I've seen Lua(La)TeX users recurring to callbacks (process input buffer) to
make string replacements and I've done so myself sometimes. Does ConTeXt do
preprocessing the same way or is a better alternative possible? Thank you
Hans, after your explanation I'm actually curious now about details, but my
knowledge is too limited now (maybe reading source codes would be better?
Worse?). I do a bit of C, but I don't know about Pascal at all and I'm not
sure where to start from in order to understand TeX better. Well, at
On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 10:48 PM Jairo A. del Rio
wrote:
> I've read the following is not possible in TeX
>
> \def#1\macro{blabla#1}
>
> where arguments come before. The only partial exceptions are commands like
> \atop or \over, which are in fact primitives. Is there a way to do this in
>
On 6/28/2020 10:48 PM, Jairo A. del Rio wrote:
I've read the following is not possible in TeX
\def#1\macro{blabla#1}
where arguments come before. The only partial exceptions are commands
like \atop or \over, which are in fact primitives. Is there a way to do
this in ConTeXt?
Could it be a
I've read the following is not possible in TeX
\def#1\macro{blabla#1}
where arguments come before. The only partial exceptions are commands like
\atop or \over, which are in fact primitives. Is there a way to do this in
ConTeXt?
Could it be a feature request for LuaMetaTeX? I've seen Hans
12 matches
Mail list logo
