xparse g argument should be avoided?












6














In new versions of xparse the manual states the following: (in 2. Backwards Compatibility)




One role of xparse is to describe existing LaTeX interfaces, including some that are rather unusual in LaTeX (as opposed to formats such as plain TeX) such as delimited arguments. As such, the package defines some argument specifiers that should largely be avoided nowadays as using them in packages leads to inconsistent user interfaces. The simplest syntax is often best, with argument specifications such as mmmm or ommmm (...)




What kind of problems like that 'inconsistent user interfaces' might exhibit using for example g-parameter or G-parameter?



I'm the author of a class that rely on macros based on these parameters and would be good knowing if authors of LaTeX3'xparse will drop the support of these parameters or what issues on which circumstances might exhibit...



Edit: As not everyone is familiar with the different parameter types the xparse package provides, here's the description for g and G from the documentation:




g: An optional argument given inside a pair of TeX group tokens (in standard LaTeX, {...}), which returns -NoValue- if not present.
G: As for g but returns <default> if no value is given: G{<default>}.







latex3 xparse parameters







share|improve this question




















  • 2




    I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
    – Peter Grill
    Dec 7 '18 at 6:10


















6














In new versions of xparse the manual states the following: (in 2. Backwards Compatibility)




One role of xparse is to describe existing LaTeX interfaces, including some that are rather unusual in LaTeX (as opposed to formats such as plain TeX) such as delimited arguments. As such, the package defines some argument specifiers that should largely be avoided nowadays as using them in packages leads to inconsistent user interfaces. The simplest syntax is often best, with argument specifications such as mmmm or ommmm (...)




What kind of problems like that 'inconsistent user interfaces' might exhibit using for example g-parameter or G-parameter?



I'm the author of a class that rely on macros based on these parameters and would be good knowing if authors of LaTeX3'xparse will drop the support of these parameters or what issues on which circumstances might exhibit...



Edit: As not everyone is familiar with the different parameter types the xparse package provides, here's the description for g and G from the documentation:




g: An optional argument given inside a pair of TeX group tokens (in standard LaTeX, {...}), which returns -NoValue- if not present.
G: As for g but returns <default> if no value is given: G{<default>}.







latex3 xparse parameters







share|improve this question




















  • 2




    I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
    – Peter Grill
    Dec 7 '18 at 6:10
















6












6








6







In new versions of xparse the manual states the following: (in 2. Backwards Compatibility)




One role of xparse is to describe existing LaTeX interfaces, including some that are rather unusual in LaTeX (as opposed to formats such as plain TeX) such as delimited arguments. As such, the package defines some argument specifiers that should largely be avoided nowadays as using them in packages leads to inconsistent user interfaces. The simplest syntax is often best, with argument specifications such as mmmm or ommmm (...)




What kind of problems like that 'inconsistent user interfaces' might exhibit using for example g-parameter or G-parameter?



I'm the author of a class that rely on macros based on these parameters and would be good knowing if authors of LaTeX3'xparse will drop the support of these parameters or what issues on which circumstances might exhibit...



Edit: As not everyone is familiar with the different parameter types the xparse package provides, here's the description for g and G from the documentation:




g: An optional argument given inside a pair of TeX group tokens (in standard LaTeX, {...}), which returns -NoValue- if not present.
G: As for g but returns <default> if no value is given: G{<default>}.







latex3 xparse parameters







share|improve this question















In new versions of xparse the manual states the following: (in 2. Backwards Compatibility)




One role of xparse is to describe existing LaTeX interfaces, including some that are rather unusual in LaTeX (as opposed to formats such as plain TeX) such as delimited arguments. As such, the package defines some argument specifiers that should largely be avoided nowadays as using them in packages leads to inconsistent user interfaces. The simplest syntax is often best, with argument specifications such as mmmm or ommmm (...)




What kind of problems like that 'inconsistent user interfaces' might exhibit using for example g-parameter or G-parameter?



I'm the author of a class that rely on macros based on these parameters and would be good knowing if authors of LaTeX3'xparse will drop the support of these parameters or what issues on which circumstances might exhibit...



Edit: As not everyone is familiar with the different parameter types the xparse package provides, here's the description for g and G from the documentation:




g: An optional argument given inside a pair of TeX group tokens (in standard LaTeX, {...}), which returns -NoValue- if not present.
G: As for g but returns <default> if no value is given: G{<default>}.







latex3 xparse parameters




latex3 xparse parameters






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 days ago









TeXnician

24.3k63085




24.3k63085










asked Dec 7 '18 at 4:04









Emilio Lazo

45429




45429








  • 2




    I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
    – Peter Grill
    Dec 7 '18 at 6:10
















  • 2




    I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
    – Peter Grill
    Dec 7 '18 at 6:10










2




2




I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
– Peter Grill
Dec 7 '18 at 6:10






I think the main issue is that it is not the usual LaTeX style to have optional parameters before the mandatory parameters and that the optional parameters are to be specified with a and not a {}. Another issue is in deterring the last optional parameter which may confuse people if the omit the last optional parameter and put a trailing % after the use of the macro.
– Peter Grill
Dec 7 '18 at 6:10












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















8














The xparse package is primarily meant to allow definition of 'LaTeX2e-like' commands, though it also can standardise the description of a wider range of interfaces. The LaTeX2e kernel is very consistent in using {...} for mandatory arguments and [...] for optional ones ((...) is used for picture-mode arguments). As such, the g-type argument is an outlier: it's not really standard LaTeX2e usage at all. We include it as it does come up in e.g. beamer,



begin{frame}{title}{sub-title}


Probably, written today one would normally use keyval systems for such cases



begin{frame}[title = ..., subtitle = ...]


In general, I would avoid using g-type arguments for new commands.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 6:28










  • @EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
    – Joseph Wright♦
    Dec 8 '18 at 16:37










  • Yes, it is! Thank you.
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 18:35











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463626%2fxparse-g-argument-should-be-avoided%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









8














The xparse package is primarily meant to allow definition of 'LaTeX2e-like' commands, though it also can standardise the description of a wider range of interfaces. The LaTeX2e kernel is very consistent in using {...} for mandatory arguments and [...] for optional ones ((...) is used for picture-mode arguments). As such, the g-type argument is an outlier: it's not really standard LaTeX2e usage at all. We include it as it does come up in e.g. beamer,



begin{frame}{title}{sub-title}


Probably, written today one would normally use keyval systems for such cases



begin{frame}[title = ..., subtitle = ...]


In general, I would avoid using g-type arguments for new commands.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 6:28










  • @EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
    – Joseph Wright♦
    Dec 8 '18 at 16:37










  • Yes, it is! Thank you.
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 18:35
















8














The xparse package is primarily meant to allow definition of 'LaTeX2e-like' commands, though it also can standardise the description of a wider range of interfaces. The LaTeX2e kernel is very consistent in using {...} for mandatory arguments and [...] for optional ones ((...) is used for picture-mode arguments). As such, the g-type argument is an outlier: it's not really standard LaTeX2e usage at all. We include it as it does come up in e.g. beamer,



begin{frame}{title}{sub-title}


Probably, written today one would normally use keyval systems for such cases



begin{frame}[title = ..., subtitle = ...]


In general, I would avoid using g-type arguments for new commands.






share|improve this answer





















  • Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 6:28










  • @EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
    – Joseph Wright♦
    Dec 8 '18 at 16:37










  • Yes, it is! Thank you.
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 18:35














8












8








8






The xparse package is primarily meant to allow definition of 'LaTeX2e-like' commands, though it also can standardise the description of a wider range of interfaces. The LaTeX2e kernel is very consistent in using {...} for mandatory arguments and [...] for optional ones ((...) is used for picture-mode arguments). As such, the g-type argument is an outlier: it's not really standard LaTeX2e usage at all. We include it as it does come up in e.g. beamer,



begin{frame}{title}{sub-title}


Probably, written today one would normally use keyval systems for such cases



begin{frame}[title = ..., subtitle = ...]


In general, I would avoid using g-type arguments for new commands.






share|improve this answer












The xparse package is primarily meant to allow definition of 'LaTeX2e-like' commands, though it also can standardise the description of a wider range of interfaces. The LaTeX2e kernel is very consistent in using {...} for mandatory arguments and [...] for optional ones ((...) is used for picture-mode arguments). As such, the g-type argument is an outlier: it's not really standard LaTeX2e usage at all. We include it as it does come up in e.g. beamer,



begin{frame}{title}{sub-title}


Probably, written today one would normally use keyval systems for such cases



begin{frame}[title = ..., subtitle = ...]


In general, I would avoid using g-type arguments for new commands.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Dec 7 '18 at 7:36









Joseph Wright♦

202k21555882




202k21555882












  • Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 6:28










  • @EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
    – Joseph Wright♦
    Dec 8 '18 at 16:37










  • Yes, it is! Thank you.
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 18:35


















  • Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 6:28










  • @EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
    – Joseph Wright♦
    Dec 8 '18 at 16:37










  • Yes, it is! Thank you.
    – Emilio Lazo
    Dec 8 '18 at 18:35
















Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
– Emilio Lazo
Dec 8 '18 at 6:28




Thanks, and also to @Peter. I'm using these parameters in a convenient way, the same way as they was conceived by LaTeX3 developers I guess. I understand the motivation behind hiding or advising against the use of these parameters, but the text quoted from the manual on 'backwards compatibility' should be understood as 'please don't use them anymore, they will be removed soon'? These 'inconsistent user interfaces' would refer to an inconsistency regarding the standard LaTeX parameter usage or instead it would refer to unpredictable results if we insist on using them?
– Emilio Lazo
Dec 8 '18 at 6:28












@EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
– Joseph Wright♦
Dec 8 '18 at 16:37




@EmilioLazo Inconsistent with LaTeX conventions
– Joseph Wright♦
Dec 8 '18 at 16:37












Yes, it is! Thank you.
– Emilio Lazo
Dec 8 '18 at 18:35




Yes, it is! Thank you.
– Emilio Lazo
Dec 8 '18 at 18:35


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid …



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f463626%2fxparse-g-argument-should-be-avoided%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







-

Popular posts from this blog

Сан-Квентин

Image
Сан-Квентин Местоположение Сан-Квентин, Калифорния Координаты 37°56′13″ с. ш. 122°29′20″ з. д. H G Я O L Текущий статус Действует Режим безопасности минимальный и максимальный Количество мест 3 302 Открытие Июнь 1852 Находится в ведомстве California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Начальник Mike Martel, начальник  Сан-Квентин на Викискладе Сан-Квентин (англ.  San Quentin ) — тюрьма, располагающаяся на 432 акрах (около 1,7 км²), на мысе Сан-Квентин, в округе Марин, штат Калифорния, США. Тюрьма штата Калифорния Сан-Квентин была открыта в июле 1852 года и является старейшей в штате. Она была построена заключёнными, которые проживали в течение строительства на тюремном судне Вабан. В Сан-Квентине отбывали наказание и мужчины, и женщины до 1934 года, когда построили женскую тюрьму в Техачапи и туда перевели всех заключённых женщин. В Сан-Квентине приводятся в исполнение смертные казни, для этого имеется газовая камера, но...
Read more

8-я гвардейская общевойсковая армия

Image
8-я гвардейская общевойсковая ордена Ленина армия Награды: Войска: РККА → Советская армия → СВ России Род войск: Формирование: 1943 Расформирование (преобразование): 1992 Предшественник: 62-я армия (1942—43) → 8-я гвардейская общевойсковая армия (1943—92) → 8-й гвардейский армейский корпус (1992—98) Боевой путь Изюм-Барвенковская операция Донбасская операция Запорожская операция Битва за Днепр Днепропетровская операция Березнеговато-Снигирёвская операция Одесская операция Люблин-Брестская операция Варшавско-Познанская операция Восточно-Померанская операция Берлинская наступательная операция У этого термина существуют и другие значения, см. 8-я армия. Фотография Гвардейского Красного Знамени (лицевая сторона) 8-й гвардейской армии , образца 1943 года. Фотография Гвардейского Красного Знамени (оборотная сторона) 8-й гвардейской армии , образца 1943 года. 8-я гвардейская общевойсковая ордена Ленина армия  — гвардейское фор...
Read more

Алькесар

Image
Муниципалитет Алькесар Alquézar Герб 42°10′16″ с. ш. 0°01′27″ в. д. H G Я O L Страна Испания   Испания Автономное сообщество Арагон Провинция Уэска Комарка Сомонтано-де-Барбастро Алькальд Хосе Марияно Альтемир Ласкорс (ИСРП) История и география Площадь 32,36 км² Высота НУМ 660 м Часовой пояс UTC+1, летом UTC+2 Население Население 313 человек ( 2010 ) Плотность 9,92 чел./км² Этнохороним alquezarano/-a Цифровые идентификаторы Телефонный код +34 974 Почтовые индексы 22112 Автомобильный код HU alquezar.org   (исп.) Показать/скрыть карты Алькесар Алькесар Алькесар  Аудио, фото и видео на Викискладе Алькесар (исп.  Alquézar ) — муниципалитет в Испании, входит в провинцию Уэска, в составе автономного сообщества Арагон. Муниципалитет находится в составе района (комарки) Сомонтано-де-Барбастро. Занимает площадь 32,36 км². Население — 321 челове...
Read more