Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On Thu, 24 May 2018 14:50:36 +0200, Hans Hagen wrote: > On 5/24/2018 11:21 AM, Christoph Reller wrote: >> On Wed, 23 May 2018 16:01:05 +0200, Hans Hagen wrote: >>> On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and optional arguments, e.g: \MyCommand[optional][mandatory] Consider the following MWE: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand[#1]{ \dosingleempty{\doMyCommand[#1]}} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]{ \doifsomething{#1}{number 1: #1\par} \doifsomething{#2}{number 2: #2}\blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext In last year's versions of ConTeXt the output was number 1: A number 2: B number 1: A In the latest version of ConTeXt the output is number 1: A number 2: B number 2: A Is this behavior intended? How can I make a definition whose behavior does not change in new versions of ConTeXt? >>> i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: >>> >>> \unexpanded\def\MyCommand >>> {\dodoubleempty\doMyCommand} >>> >>> \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]% >>> {\iffirstargument >>>number 1: #1% >>>\par >>> \fi >>> \ifsecondargument >>>number 2: #2% >>> \fi >>> \blank[big]} >>> >>> \starttext >>> \MyCommand[A][B] >>> \MyCommand[A] >>> \stoptext >> >> Thank you Hans for this information. My question is rather about error >> handling. I want: >> >> \MyCommand[A][B] % <- succeeds with #1->A, #2->B >> \MyCommand[A] % <- succeeds with #1->A >> \MyCommand % <- fails with "! Use of \MyCommand doesn't match its definition" >> >> I just wanted to ask whether there is a standard way to achieve this >> with \doempty. If not, then this is also okay. > just use \dodoubleempty instead Thank you for your hint, Hans. \dodoubleempty renders both arguments optional and hence the command can be used without any argument, which is not what I intended. Of course I can still test in the command's definition whether at least one argument is given and generate an error myself. In i-context.pdf, many arguments are documented as being optional and I assume that all the others are mandatory. A quick test has, however, shown that when omitting mandatory arguments, either no error is generated (e.g., nothing is setup or defined) or an obscure error emerges other than "! Use of \ doesn't match its definition". So I take it as a design decision that reporting missing mandatory arguments as errors is not part of the interface implementation, and that is a perfectly acceptable decision for me. It is just good to know. Thank you all for your highly valued feedback! Cheers, Christoph ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On Thu, 24 May 2018 11:24:34 +0200 Christoph Reller wrote: > Thank you Hraban for pointing me to the wiki. I was aware of this page > but it contains only the case of mandatory arguments in curly braces > {} not in brackets []. One must *not* confuse with the LaTeX convention where "mandatory" arguments are contained in curly braces and brackets indicate "optional" arguments. As Taco states below, curly braces not only give grouping but generally are used for objects to be typeset, as for \in{Figure}{a} [fig:ref]. For new users, it is worth repeating here that arguments within braces can be either a comma-separated list of words OR a comma-separated list of keyword=value pairs, BUT NOT A MIXTURE OF BOTH. Generally, a keyword=value exists for all words, for example \cite[authoryear][ref] and \cite[alternative=authoryear,reference=ref] values can be grouped using curly braces, as in \cite[alternative=authoryear,lefttext={{see },}][ref1,ref2] where the lefttext is associated with the first cite reference (and none with the second). This can be tricky but is in fact rather straight-forward. Alan P.S. The wiki is only as good as users make it; some pages have not been changed since mkii... On Thu, 24 May 2018 15:43:27 +0200 Taco Hoekwater wrote: > The original intent was for user-level commands to have square > brackets for arguments setting things up, and curly braces for > arguments that are actually typeset. That is where commands like \in > come from, where the braced part is optional and the bracketed part > required. ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
Hi, > Arguments in brackets are always optional (if I don’t misunderstand), > depending on your own logic (\if*argument, \ifempty etc.) The original intent was for user-level commands to have square brackets for arguments setting things up, and curly braces for arguments that are actually typeset. That is where commands like \in come from, where the braced part is optional and the bracketed part required. Internal low-level commands tended to use braces more often because of efficiency considerations. (also, at the primitive level, TeX syntax is inconsistent anyway, with various primitives having quite different syntactical conventions). Nowadays, this is less relevant, with lots of stuff handled by lua instead. Best wishes, Taco ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
Am 2018-05-24 um 11:24 schrieb Christoph Reller : > On Wed, 23 May 2018 17:54:39 +0200, Henning Hraban Ramm > wrote: What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and optional arguments, e.g: >>> i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: >> >> Also, there’s documentation at >> http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Commands_with_optional_arguments >> If there’s something wrong, please fix it yourself or come back to this list >> ;) > > Thank you Hraban for pointing me to the wiki. I was aware of this page > but it contains only the case of mandatory arguments in curly braces > {} not in brackets []. Arguments in brackets are always optional (if I don’t misunderstand), depending on your own logic (\if*argument, \ifempty etc.) see also http://wiki.contextgarden.net/System_Macros : http://wiki.contextgarden.net/System_Macros/Handling_Arguments http://wiki.contextgarden.net/System_Macros/Branches_and_Decisions etc. I need to read these more often myself... Greetlings, Hraban --- https://www.fiee.net http://wiki.contextgarden.net https://www.dreiviertelhaus.de GPG Key ID 1C9B22FD ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On 5/24/2018 11:21 AM, Christoph Reller wrote: On Wed, 23 May 2018 16:01:05 +0200, Hans Hagen wrote: On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: Hi, What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and optional arguments, e.g: \MyCommand[optional][mandatory] Consider the following MWE: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand[#1]{ \dosingleempty{\doMyCommand[#1]}} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]{ \doifsomething{#1}{number 1: #1\par} \doifsomething{#2}{number 2: #2}\blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext In last year's versions of ConTeXt the output was number 1: A number 2: B number 1: A In the latest version of ConTeXt the output is number 1: A number 2: B number 2: A Is this behavior intended? How can I make a definition whose behavior does not change in new versions of ConTeXt? i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand {\dodoubleempty\doMyCommand} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]% {\iffirstargument number 1: #1% \par \fi \ifsecondargument number 2: #2% \fi \blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext Thank you Hans for this information. My question is rather about error handling. I want: \MyCommand[A][B] % <- succeeds with #1->A, #2->B \MyCommand[A] % <- succeeds with #1->A \MyCommand % <- fails with "! Use of \MyCommand doesn't match its definition" I just wanted to ask whether there is a standard way to achieve this with \doempty. If not, then this is also okay. just use \dodoubleempty instead - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl - ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On Wed, 23 May 2018 17:54:39 +0200, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote: > Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 17:54:39 +0200 > From: Henning Hraban Ramm > To: mailing list for ConTeXt users > Subject: Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and > mandatory arguments > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > Am 2018-05-23 um 16:01 schrieb Hans Hagen : > >> On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: >>> Hi, >>> What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and >>> optional arguments, e.g: >> i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: > > Also, there’s documentation at > http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Commands_with_optional_arguments > > If there’s something wrong, please fix it yourself or come back to this list > ;) > Thank you Hraban for pointing me to the wiki. I was aware of this page but it contains only the case of mandatory arguments in curly braces {} not in brackets []. Cheers, Christoph ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
[NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On Wed, 23 May 2018 16:01:05 +0200, Hans Hagen wrote: > > On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: >> Hi, >> >> What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and >> optional arguments, e.g: >> >> \MyCommand[optional][mandatory] >> >> Consider the following MWE: >> >> \unexpanded\def\MyCommand[#1]{ >>\dosingleempty{\doMyCommand[#1]}} >> \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]{ >>\doifsomething{#1}{number 1: #1\par} >>\doifsomething{#2}{number 2: #2}\blank[big]} >> \starttext >> \MyCommand[A][B] >> \MyCommand[A] >> \stoptext >> >> In last year's versions of ConTeXt the output was >> >> number 1: A >> number 2: B >> number 1: A >> >> In the latest version of ConTeXt the output is >> >> number 1: A >> number 2: B >> number 2: A >> >> Is this behavior intended? How can I make a definition whose behavior >> does not change in new versions of ConTeXt? > i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: > > \unexpanded\def\MyCommand >{\dodoubleempty\doMyCommand} > > \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]% >{\iffirstargument > number 1: #1% > \par > \fi > \ifsecondargument > number 2: #2% > \fi > \blank[big]} > > \starttext > \MyCommand[A][B] > \MyCommand[A] > \stoptext Thank you Hans for this information. My question is rather about error handling. I want: \MyCommand[A][B] % <- succeeds with #1->A, #2->B \MyCommand[A] % <- succeeds with #1->A \MyCommand % <- fails with "! Use of \MyCommand doesn't match its definition" I just wanted to ask whether there is a standard way to achieve this with \doempty. If not, then this is also okay. Cheers, Christoph ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
Am 2018-05-23 um 16:01 schrieb Hans Hagen : > On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: >> Hi, >> What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and >> optional arguments, e.g: > i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: Also, there’s documentation at http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Commands_with_optional_arguments If there’s something wrong, please fix it yourself or come back to this list ;) Greetlings, Hraban --- https://www.fiee.net http://wiki.contextgarden.net https://www.dreiviertelhaus.de GPG Key ID 1C9B22FD ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
Re: [NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
On 5/23/2018 3:39 PM, Christoph Reller wrote: Hi, What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and optional arguments, e.g: \MyCommand[optional][mandatory] Consider the following MWE: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand[#1]{ \dosingleempty{\doMyCommand[#1]}} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]{ \doifsomething{#1}{number 1: #1\par} \doifsomething{#2}{number 2: #2}\blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext In last year's versions of ConTeXt the output was number 1: A number 2: B number 1: A In the latest version of ConTeXt the output is number 1: A number 2: B number 2: A Is this behavior intended? How can I make a definition whose behavior does not change in new versions of ConTeXt? i'm not sure wht happens at your end but this is the best way: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand {\dodoubleempty\doMyCommand} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]% {\iffirstargument number 1: #1% \par \fi \ifsecondargument number 2: #2% \fi \blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl - ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___
[NTG-context] Defining command with optional and mandatory arguments
Hi, What is the right way to define a command with both mandatory and optional arguments, e.g: \MyCommand[optional][mandatory] Consider the following MWE: \unexpanded\def\MyCommand[#1]{ \dosingleempty{\doMyCommand[#1]}} \def\doMyCommand[#1][#2]{ \doifsomething{#1}{number 1: #1\par} \doifsomething{#2}{number 2: #2}\blank[big]} \starttext \MyCommand[A][B] \MyCommand[A] \stoptext In last year's versions of ConTeXt the output was number 1: A number 2: B number 1: A In the latest version of ConTeXt the output is number 1: A number 2: B number 2: A Is this behavior intended? How can I make a definition whose behavior does not change in new versions of ConTeXt? Cheers, Christoph ___ 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://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___