summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty')
-rw-r--r--Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty234
1 files changed, 234 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..fac72144059
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/fontinst/base/multislot.sty
@@ -0,0 +1,234 @@
+% multislot.sty
+%
+% Second version
+
+
+\needsfontinstversion{1.900}
+% Relies heavily on _etx_pass_hook commands.
+
+
+%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% RESOURCES USED %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
+%
+% The following classes of control sequences are used by the multislot
+% routines, in addition to the ones defined below and the ones fontinst
+% normally uses:
+%
+% \name-NUM
+%
+% where NUM is a number consisting of one, two, or three decimal digits.
+% These are also used by \pltomtx, so they probably already exist as
+% hash table entries.
+
+
+
+%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% SAVE CATCODES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
+%
+% Save the current values of the catcodes of space, @, NL, ~ and _.
+% _ and @ are made letters, ~ is a space, and space and NL are ignored.
+
+\edef\spacecatcode{\the\catcode`\ }
+\edef\atcatcode{\the\catcode`\@}
+\edef\nlcatcode{\the\catcode`\^^M}
+\edef\underscorecatcode{\the\catcode`\_}
+\edef\tildecatcode{\the\catcode`\~}
+
+\catcode`\ =9
+\catcode`\^^M=9
+\catcode`\@=11
+\catcode`\_=11
+\catcode`\~=10
+
+
+%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% MULTIPLE SLOT COMMANDS %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
+%
+% The user-level commands are quite simple. As usual, you can write
+%
+% \setslot{NAME}
+% <slot commands>
+% \endsetslot
+%
+% to assign a glyph to a slot. The difference is that if there are
+% multiple \setslot commands for a slot, this will no longer cause
+% strange results. Instead, only the first \setslot-\endsetslot pair
+% for each slot will be used, the others are ignored.
+%
+% If you instead write
+%
+% \resetslot{NAME}
+% <slot commands>
+% \endsetslot
+%
+% then this will override any earlier occurences of \setslot or
+% \resetslot. Finally, there is the command
+%
+% \unsetslot{NUMBER}
+%
+% which makes fontinst forget any earlier occurences of \setslot
+% or \resetslot commands for that particular slot.
+
+
+% The way this works is that every \setslot or \resetslot command is
+% implicitly assigned an index, namely the number of such commands
+% perviously encountered since the start of the ETX pass. The count
+% register \slot_index is allocated to keep track of the current
+% index:
+
+\newcount\slot_index
+\def\clear_slot_index{\slot_index=\m@ne}
+\add_to\pre_first_etx_pass_hook{\clear_slot_index}
+\add_to\pre_second_etx_pass_hook{\clear_slot_index}
+\add_to\pre_third_etx_pass_hook{\clear_slot_index}
+\add_to\pre_fourth_etx_pass_hook{\clear_slot_index}
+
+% \setslot, \setleftboundary, and \setrightboundary increments the
+% counter just before checking it.
+
+
+
+% The point of maintaining the index is that the index of the
+% \setslot (or whatever) that actually sets a particular slot gets
+% stored in the \name-SLOT control sequence (which is \mathchardef'ed
+% to the index). After assignments are made, all a \setslot (or
+% whatever) needs to do is to check whether the stored index matches
+% the current one, and gobble itself if they don't.
+
+% The basic check is performed by the command \later_index_check.
+% This has the syntax
+%
+% \later_index_check{SLOT}{<else-code>}
+%
+% and expands to nothing if this \setslot will be active, but to
+% <else-code> if it will not.
+\def\later_index_check#1{
+ \x_cs\ifnum {name-#1}=\slot_index
+ \expandafter\gobble_one
+ \else
+ \expandafter\identity_one
+ \fi
+}
+% However, when deciding which \setslots will be active, the condition
+% to test is slightly different: is the control sequence in question
+% already defined to be a mathchar token? If it isn't, then this will
+% be the active \setslot.
+\def\setslot_index_check#1{\x_cs\setslot_index_check_i{name-#1}}
+\def\temp_command#1{
+ \def\setslot_index_check_ii##1#1##2\setslot_index_check_ii{##1}
+ \def\setslot_index_check_i##1{
+ \expandafter\setslot_index_check_ii \expandafter\ifx
+ \expandafter$ \meaning##1 #1 0 \setslot_index_check_ii $
+ \expandafter\identity_one
+ \else
+ \mathchardef##1=\slot_index
+ \expandafter\gobble_one
+ \fi
+ }
+}
+\expandafter\temp_command \expandafter{ \string\mathchar " }
+
+% The stated definition of \setslot_index_check should thus be in
+% force during the first etx pass, but after that the
+% \later_index_check definition should rule.
+\add_to\post_first_etx_pass_hook{
+ \let\setslot_index_check=\later_index_check
+}
+
+% The following is used to ignore a \setslot--\endsetslot or
+% \setleftboundary--\endsetleftboundary construction; the argument is
+% the command which marks the end. The reason not to use
+% \gobble_setslot is that it still executes \end_do_slot, which is
+% quite wrong for the kind of ignoring done here.
+\def\ignore_to_end#1{
+ \bgroup
+ \let#1=\fi
+ \expandafter
+ \egroup
+ \iffalse
+}
+
+
+% The \setslot, \setleftboundary, and \setrightboundary commands must
+% be equipped with checks at the start.
+\def\checked_setslot{
+ \advance \slot_index \@ne
+ \setslot_index_check{\the\slot_number}{
+ \advance \slot_number \@ne
+ \ignore_to_end\endsetslot
+ }
+ \unchecked_setslot
+}
+
+\def\checked_setleftboundary{
+ \advance \slot_index \@ne
+ \setslot_index_check{leftboundary}{\ignore_to_end\endsetleftboundary}
+ \unchecked_setleftboundary
+}
+
+\def\checked_setrightboundary#1{
+ \advance \slot_index \@ne
+ \setslot_index_check{\the\slot_number}{
+ \advance \slot_number \@ne
+ \gobble_two
+ }
+ \unchecked_setrightboundary{#1}
+}
+\add_to\pre_first_etx_pass_hook{
+ \let\unchecked_setslot=\setslot
+ \let\setslot=\checked_setslot
+ \let\unchecked_setleftboundary=\setleftboundary
+ \let\setleftboundary=\checked_setleftboundary
+ \let\unchecked_setrightboundary=\setrightboundary
+ \let\setrightboundary=\checked_setrightboundary
+}
+% But that's it, as far as the \set... commands are concerned.
+
+
+% What about \unsetslot? In principle, it _should_ just be a matter of
+\def\unsetslot#1{
+ \eval_expr{#1}
+ \x_cs\let{name-\the\result}\undefined_command
+}
+\add_to\post_first_etx_pass_hook{\let\unsetslot=\gobble_one}
+% given which \resetslot is simply
+\def\resetslot{\unsetslot\slot_number \setslot}
+% and this sort-of works, but not quite.
+%
+% The problem is that the ordinary slot assignment table, which is
+% used for ligature and kerning instructions, is not updated by
+% \unsetslot. Hence ligatures and kerns will be generated as if all
+% glyphs that have been set for a slot are present there; after
+%
+% \nextslot{108}
+% \setslot{l} \endsetslot
+%
+% \nextslot{108}
+% \resetslot{lambda} \endsetslot
+%
+% the effect will be as if one had given the command
+%
+% \setleftkerning{lambda}{l}{1000}
+%
+% and moreover the same happens for ligatures, so an f + l -> fl
+% ligature will also work as an f + lambda -> fl ligature.
+%
+% This is of course a BUG, and there doesn't seem to be any way
+% around it, short of adding another pass of reading ETX files. Doing
+% so would probably not be worth the effort, since the usefulness of
+% a \resetslot command is not clear; unlike \resetglyph, it cannot be
+% used to amend an existing \set..., but only to override it.
+
+
+
+%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% RESTORE CATCODES %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
+%
+% Restore the catcodes that were changed.
+
+\catcode`\@=\atcatcode
+\catcode`\^^M=\nlcatcode
+\catcode`\ =\spacecatcode
+\catcode`\~=\tildecatcode
+\catcode`\_=\underscorecatcode
+
+%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% THE END %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
+
+\endinput
+