summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorKarl Berry <karl@freefriends.org>2009-09-22 21:29:12 +0000
committerKarl Berry <karl@freefriends.org>2009-09-22 21:29:12 +0000
commitb726373a93a0839531e0625f266731041b265ba3 (patch)
treed9279151fce0bd7f6cacfe3230bc0ac2cb30140b /Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig
parent4e8ef3e10b667867bf3d14fd31f7ed2a55ec0ef4 (diff)
doc fixes
git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@15423 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751
Diffstat (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig')
-rw-r--r--Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex95
1 files changed, 52 insertions, 43 deletions
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
index dcca3a3cecf..8d1ae191552 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
@@ -18,47 +18,56 @@
% Rationale for primitives prefixing.
%
-% 1. All current macro packages run smoothly on top of pdf(e)TeX, so those
+% 1 All current macro packages run smoothly on top of pdf(e)TeX, so those
% primitives are left untouched.
-% 2. Other non-TeX82 primitives in LuaTeX may cause name clashes with existing
-% macros in macro packages, especially when the use very "natural" names
-% such as \outputbox, \mathstyle etc. Such a probability for name clashes is
-% highly undesirable if LuaTeX is to replace pdfTeX as the default engine
-% some day, and still undesirable even if it does not, anyway, since some
-% level of compatibility never hurts.
-% 3. The LuaTeX team doesn't want to apply a systematic prefixing policy, but
-% kindly provided a tool allowing to apply it. So we chose to use it.
-% Previously, we even disabled the extra primitives, but now we feel it's
-% better to enable them with systematic prefexing, in order to avoid that
-% each and every macro package (or user) enables them with various and
-% inconsistent prefixes (including the empty prefix).
-% 4. The 'luatex' prefix was chosen since it is already used as a prefix for
-% some primitives, such as \luatexversion: since way, those promitive don't
-% end up with a double prefix (see tex.enableprimitive in the luatex manual
-% for details).
-% 5. The \directlua primitive is provided both with its natural name (allowing
-% to easily detect LuaTeX-besed formats) and a prefixed version
-% \luatexdirectlua (for consistency with \luatexlatelua).
-% 6. Various remarks
-% (a) The obvious drawback of such a prefixing policy is that the names used
-% by LaTeX or generic macro writer won't match the names used in the
-% manual. We hope this is compensated by the gain in backwards
-% compatibility.
-% (b) All primitives dealing with Unicode math already begin with \U, and
-% maybe will match the names of XeTeX primitives some day, so maybe
-% prefixing was not necessary/desirable for them. However, we tried to
-% make the prefixing rule as simple as possible, so that point (a) doesn't
-% get too annoying.
-% (c) The final name of some primitive may sound strange, namely those
-% already containing the name of an engine, such as \luatexOmegaVersion.
-% However, since LuaTeX is not a drop-in replacement for Omega/Aleph, we
-% felt it wrong to provide \OmegaVersion.
-% (d) Maybe some day we'll realise that it is better to provide all
-% primitives without prefixing at all, after all. If this happens, it will
-% be easy to add the unprefixed primitives in the format while keeping the
-% prefixed names for compatibility. It wouldn't work the other way round
-% (ie, realising that we should not provide the unprefixed primitives
-% would cause huge compatibility problems for all LuaTeX-specific macro
-% packages).
-
-
+%
+% 2 Other non-TeX82 primitives in LuaTeX may cause name clashes with
+% existing macros in macro packages, especially when they use very
+% "natural" names such as \outputbox, \mathstyle etc. Such a
+% probability for name clashes is undesirable, since the most existing
+% LaTeX documents that run without change under LuaTeX, the better.
+%
+% 3 The LuaTeX team doesn't want to apply a systematic prefixing policy,
+% but kindly provided a tool allowing prefixes to be applied. So we
+% chose to use it. Previously, we even disabled the extra primitives,
+% but now we feel it's better to enable them with systematic
+% prefexing, in order to avoid that each and every macro package (or
+% user) enables them with various and inconsistent prefixes (including
+% the empty prefix).
+%
+% 4 The 'luatex' prefix was chosen since it is already used as a prefix
+% for some primitives, such as \luatexversion: this way, those
+% promitive don't end up with a double prefix (see
+% tex.enableprimitives in the luatex manual for details).
+%
+% 5 The \directlua primitive is provided both with its natural name
+% (allowing easy detection of LuaTeX-besed formats) and a prefixed
+% version \luatexdirectlua (for consistency with \luatexlatelua).
+%
+% 6 Various remarks:
+% (a) The obvious drawback of such a prefixing policy is that the names
+% used by LaTeX or generic macro writer won't match the names used
+% in the manual. We hope this is compensated by the gain in
+% backwards compatibility.
+%
+% (b) All primitives dealing with Unicode math already begin with \U,
+% and maybe will match the names of XeTeX primitives some day, so
+% maybe prefixing was not necessary/desirable for them. However, we
+% tried to make the prefixing rule as simple as possible, so that
+% point (a) doesn't get even worse.
+%
+% (c) The final name of some primitive may sound strange, namely those
+% already containing the name of an engine, such as
+% \luatexOmegaVersion. However, since LuaTeX is not a drop-in
+% replacement for Omega/Aleph, we felt it wrong to provide
+% \OmegaVersion.
+%
+% (d) Maybe some day we'll feel it's better to provide all
+% primitives without prefixing. If this happens, it
+% will be easy to add the unprefixed primitives in the format while
+% keeping the prefixed names for compatibility. It wouldn't work the
+% other way round; i.e., belaatedly realizing that we should not
+% provide the unprefixed primitives would then cause break
+% any LuaTeX-specific macro packages that had been written.
+%
+% --Manuel and Karl, September 2009.