The point is not that I am without options for a practical solution here.
My point is that the difference between \typebuffer and \typefile breaks the
strict and so much appreciated congruence between like macro calls.
Therefore my post must rather be seen as a plea to the maintainer(s) of these
to consider a change in the given direction.
Hans van der Meer
> On 24 Apr 2016, at 17:04, Pablo Rodriguez <oi...@gmx.es> wrote:
>
> On 04/24/2016 10:31 AM, dr. Hans van der Meer wrote:
>> Why is there a difference in syntax between typing buffers and typing files?
>> For files enclosure in {} for buffers in [], for files optional
>> parameters, for buffers not.
>> Is it possible to make the syntax of these two the same, because their
>> usage parallels each other?
>
> Hi Hans,
>
> I wonder whether any of these two options may help you:
>
> \setuptyping[buffer][style=\ttx]
> \startbuffer[test]
> content of buffer
> \stopbuffer
> \starttext
> \typebuffer[test][style=\ss\red]
> \typefile[style=\ttx\blue]{test.txt}
> \stoptext
>
> Again, just in case it might help,
>
> Pablo
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
