Philip, you’ve made your point many times now, and I am pretty certain that everybody has understood it. Please accept that that does not imply that everybody also needs to agree with your conclusion. Please also be respectful of other people’s time.
Regards, Roland > 18 mar 2016 kl. 10:55 skrev Philip Taylor <p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk>: > > > > Arthur Reutenauer wrote: > >> Of course they can /know/: by inspecting the log file. It contains >> the exact transcript of the TeX run, and thus reflects all of TeX's >> knowledge about what happened when compiling the file; as far as >> overfull \hbox'es, etc. are concerned. > > Augmented by anything that the program elects to write to the log file. > A program can elect to write an "overfull \hbox" message to the log > file even if no overfull \hbox has actually occurred. > >> Do you *understand* what I /mean/ ? > > Not only do I understand what you mean, I also understand that you fail > to appreciate the difference between "know if an overfull \hbox has > occurred " (which is *TeX's state) and "believe that an overfull \hbox > has occurred" (which is the state of any adjunct program attempting to > determine the state of *TeX's knowledge simply by inspecting the log file). > > Philip Taylor > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex -- I'm a physicist: I have a basic working knowledge of the universe and everything it contains! - Sheldon Cooper (The Big Bang Theory) -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
