On 2023-01-05 04:35, Hans Hagen via ntg-context wrote:
On 1/5/2023 4:21 AM, Rik Kabel via ntg-context wrote:
[ snipped by rik]
Here is a more lmtx-ish variant:
\starttexdefinition tolerant protected BD #=#*#=
\removeunwantedspaces
\space % insert a space
(
\ifparameter#2\or
#1|–|#2
\orelse\ifparameter#1\or
#1–
\else
{\red I NEED A DATE OR DATES!}
\fi
)
\autoinsertedspace
\stoptexdefinition
Hans
Thank you for that. This works for me with \optionalspace, but fails in
some cases with \autoinsertedspace.
I have now re-read lowlevel-macros.pdf and have a better understanding
of what I read when first I approached it; I still have a way to go.
/Tolerant/ removes the need for /dodoubleempty/ and friends and the
two-step /macro/ and /doMacro/ dance. There was a small advantage to the
two-step, however. I had two separate macros, BD and BDNP (no parens),
as shown.
The old code in full was:
%-------------------- Birth and death dates -----------------------%
% Ferdinand de Saussure\BD{1857}{1913}
% Noam Chomsky \BD{1928}
%
% Perhaps this could be tied to an acronym-like database so that the
% dates are printed only once per person.
% \removeunwantedspaces allows this to directly follow, or follow
% after whitespace, the associated name: Name\BD{1}{2} or
% Name \BD{1}{2}.
% Using the compound indication (|–|) allows hyphenation after the
% endash. Omitting it and using a bare endash inhibits hyphenation
% ‘twixt the endash and the paren.
% By default, add parens around the dates. If none are needed due to
% the context, use \BDNP.
%
\newif\ifBDParen
\starttexdefinition unexpanded BD
\BDParentrue
\dodoublegroupempty
\doBD
\stoptexdefinition
\starttexdefinition unexpanded BDNP
\BDParenfalse
\dodoublegroupempty
\doBD
\stoptexdefinition
\starttexdefinition doBD #1#2
\removeunwantedspaces\
\ifBDParen(\fi
\ifsecondargument
#1|–|#2
\else\iffirstargument
#1–
\else
{\red I NEED A DATE OR DATES!}
\fi\fi
\ifBDParen)\fi
\autoinsertedspace
\stoptexdefinition
Both call the same doBD, but they set a flag (newif) to control
insertion or not of the parens. While there is no performance benefit
compared to having two fully separate macros, there is a maintenance
benefit in having only one place, doBD, to make changes should they be
required.
Can you suggest a way to do this under the new one-step scheme, or am I
over-thinking this?
Finally, is there any reason to go back to previously written and
properly functioning macros and convert them to the LMTX-only syntax? It
does imply committing to LMTX-only (or
--
Rik
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : https://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
