You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
As noted in #1448\dots uses \futurelet testing to determine the next token.
this has lead to multiple additions in recent releases coping with \protected and classic \protect macros, \long macros and finally \if.. tokens, It also has the issue that user-level macros are not expanded so hide any definition which would request a different dots form.
The suggestion is to "f-expand" (\romannumeral) the input stream before doing the tests.
this would expand user commands and allow the removal of most of the \meaning tests checking for macro types.
\DOTSB etc so are all \relax so would be available for testing via a simple delimited macro if the futurelet token is ifx equal to \relax
Code for this wasn't quite ready for the 2024-10 release, but should be made available via a -dev release after that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
As noted in #1448
\dots
uses\futurelet
testing to determine the next token.this has lead to multiple additions in recent releases coping with
\protected
and classic\protect
macros,\long
macros and finally\if..
tokens, It also has the issue that user-level macros are not expanded so hide any definition which would request a different dots form.The suggestion is to "f-expand" (
\romannumeral
) the input stream before doing the tests.this would expand user commands and allow the removal of most of the
\meaning
tests checking for macro types.\DOTSB
etc so are all\relax
so would be available for testing via a simple delimited macro if the futurelet token is ifx equal to\relax
Code for this wasn't quite ready for the 2024-10 release, but should be made available via a -dev release after that.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: