On 14 janv. 09, at 08:57, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Otared Kavian wrote:
Thanks Aditya for your explanation, but I must say that it is not
convincing because with mkiv one of the buffers is processed with
\processMPbuffer, while the other is not… So there must be some
other hidden behaviour
Otared Kavian wrote:
By the way, in one of your messages some time ago you said that there is
a command
\luatexversion
but it doesn't exist on my installation: is it removed or I understod
wrong?
Try \the\luatexversion, and \luatexrevision.
Best wishes,
Taco
On 14 janv. 09, at 09:31, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Otared Kavian wrote:
By the way, in one of your messages some time ago you said that
there is
a command
\luatexversion
but it doesn't exist on my installation: is it removed or I understod
wrong?
Try \the\luatexversion, and
On 14 janv. 09, at 11:30, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hans Hagen wrote:
Otared Kavian wrote:
I will leave it for Hans to figure what exactly goes wrong, but
the problem is caused by the comment characters in the axes-1
buffer.
core-buf.lua: line 253
return concat(t,separator or \n) -- \n is
Hi all,
I have a file which contains the lines below: I can typeset it and
obtain a correct result with mkii, but not with mkiv (the second
buffer named axes-1 does not result in a MetaPost graphic when one
says \processMPbuffer[axes-1]).
The file and the resulting PDF can be found on
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Otared Kavian wrote:
Hi all,
I have a file which contains the lines below: I can typeset it and obtain a
correct result with mkii, but not with mkiv (the second buffer named axes-1
does not result in a MetaPost graphic when one says
\processMPbuffer[axes-1]).
The file
On 14 janv. 09, at 06:51, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Otared Kavian wrote:
Hi all,
I have a file which contains the lines below: I can typeset it and
obtain a correct result with mkii, but not with mkiv (the second
buffer named axes-1 does not result in a MetaPost graphic
Otared Kavian wrote:
Thanks Aditya for your explanation, but I must say that it is not
convincing because with mkiv one of the buffers is processed with
\processMPbuffer, while the other is not… So there must be some other
hidden behaviour which has changed between mkii and mkiv.
I will
