Add \expandableinput #1679
Add \expandableinput #1679
Conversation
josephwright
requested review from
FrankMittelbach,
car222222 and
davidcarlisle
| @@ -6,6 +6,10 @@ to completeness or accuracy and it contains some references to files that are | |||
| not part of the distribution. | |||
| ================================================================================ | |||
|
|
|||
| 2025-01-26 Joseph Wright <[email protected]> | |||
| * ltexpl.dtx, usrguide.tex | |||
| Add \expandableinput | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There was the suggestion to use \ExpandableInput, not sure which is better or if there should/could be adifferent name
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wasn't sure if the name suggestion was all-lower or CamelCase - as this feels like a document command ...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are "document commands" the CamelCase ones?
| @@ -549,4 +549,26 @@ | |||
| %<latexrelease>\EndIncludeInRelease | |||
| % \end{macrocode} | |||
| % | |||
| % \begin{macro}{\expandableinput} | |||
| % \changes{v1.3i}{2025/02/26}{Added document level name for \cs{file_input_raw:n} (gh/514)} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if it is called raw here then perhaps \rawinput might be a better choice on the document level.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was my initial thinking, but I wanted to see how it looked to others - and we had said 'expandable input' as a name (capitalisation not specified!)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"expandable" seems to make more sense than "rawl, does it not?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As we discussed in the team meeting, getting general users to understand when they might need something expandable is hard - so I don't think there is a perfect name. I can live with \expandableinput, \ExpandableInput or \rawinput (or some others - things like \untrackedinput or \lowlevelinput would also make some sense). Basically we have to pick something :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think I'd prefer \ExpandableInput (camel case like \InputIfFileExists) \UntrackedInput would also work.
base/doc/usrguide.tex
Outdated
| \cs{expandableinput} is available: this skips recording the file name and any | ||
| file hooks, but otherwise behaves like \cs{input}. In particular, it still uses |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this wording mean/imply that "file hooks are recorded".
If so, what does this mean?
If not, then this needs rewording.
| @@ -549,4 +549,26 @@ | |||
| %<latexrelease>\EndIncludeInRelease | |||
| % \end{macrocode} | |||
| % | |||
| % \begin{macro}{\expandableinput} | |||
| % \changes{v1.3i}{2025/02/26}{Added document level name for \cs{file_input_raw:n} (gh/514)} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"expandable" seems to make more sense than "rawl, does it not?
READ ME FIRST: Please understand that in most cases we will not be able to merge a pull request because there are a lot of internal activities needed when updating the LaTeX2e sources. If you have a code suggestion please discuss it with the team first.
Internal housekeeping
Status of pull request
Checklist of required changes before merge will be approved
expl3function, so covered there)\changesentries in source includedchanges.txtupdatedltnewsX.tex(and/orlatexchanges.tex) updated