Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Simplify subscript-peeking, avoid expl3 internals (fixes #395) #397

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2017
Merged

Simplify subscript-peeking, avoid expl3 internals (fixes #395) #397

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 2, 2017

Conversation

blefloch
Copy link
Member

@blefloch blefloch commented Aug 1, 2017

unicode-math abused \__peek_true:w and other internals of expl3 rather than just copying their definitions. When I changed implementation details in l3token.dtx this broke. Now fixed by avoiding any use of internals (at least in the functions I changed).

As a separate change I made the property lists \g_@@_subs_prop and \g_@@_supers_prop's keys be simply the characters themselves rather than their meaning: this needlessly forbade characters whose catcode had been changed for whatever reason.

@wspr
Copy link
Collaborator

wspr commented Aug 2, 2017

Oh dear, of course this was all my fault! This code comes from early expl3 days and I'd forgotten it was still using peeking internals :( I'm very sorry to have taken up your time with this — thank you for taking this on.

@blefloch
Copy link
Member Author

blefloch commented Aug 2, 2017

No problem! :) Thanks for merging so quickly.

@wspr
Copy link
Collaborator

wspr commented Aug 2, 2017 via email

@blefloch
Copy link
Member Author

blefloch commented Aug 2, 2017

Anything I can do to help? E.g. rebasing the pull-request? (I'd rather not reverse the expl3 improvements.)

@wspr
Copy link
Collaborator

wspr commented Aug 2, 2017

No worries — apologies my message was a bit cryptic; just merging the code now. I don't have a good merging tool on my laptop and always seem to mess it up :)

@blefloch
Copy link
Member Author

blefloch commented Aug 2, 2017

Ok, thanks. I was worried this would be a blocker for updating to CTAN.

@wspr
Copy link
Collaborator

wspr commented Aug 2, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants