On 29-11-2010 4:57, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

On 11/29/2010 04:49 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:

...

I was wondering, since luatex is not a direct replacement of pdftex, omega or aleph, what is the point of having such primitives? Wouldn't it be more cleaner of they are removed or is there any use for them?

I have no opinion on these (I certainly do not use them myself)

we could remove them before version 1.0 arrives as I don't expect anyone to use those omega / aleph names ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------

On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 05:16:22PM +0100, Martin Schröder wrote:

2010/11/29 Khaled Hosny :

...

I was wondering, since luatex is not a direct replacement of pdftex, omega or aleph, what is the point of having such primitives? Wouldn't it be more cleaner of they are removed or is there any use for them?

pdftexversion pdftexrevision

OmegaVersion

AlephVersion Alephminorversion Alephrevision Alephversion Omegaminorversion Omegarevision Omegaversion

eTeXVersion eTeXminorversion eTeXrevision eTeXversion

Macros that use these primitives (e.g. pdftex.def) will still work.

Yes, but is that safe, i.e. is it safe to blindly treat luatex as pdftex vXX or etex vXX? Regards, Khaled -- Khaled Hosny Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team Free font developer

On 30 November 2010 Hans Hagen wrote:

On 30-11-2010 12:09, Idris Samawi Hamid ادريس سماوي حامد wrote:

...

On Mon, 29 Nov 2010 08:49:32 -0700, Khaled Hosny wrote:

...

I was wondering, since luatex is not a direct replacement of pdftex, omega or aleph, what is the point of having such primitives? Wouldn't it be more cleaner of they are removed or is there any use for them?

It may be that Yannis and other omega users still need them. luatex used be a direct replacement for aleph (well, almost), so that with little mods one could run an aleph file once upon a time....

The translation filters already have been removed a while ago so old omega code will not run as expected. Also, the number of directions has been limited (after we discussed it with John at eurotex).

Do you propose to drop \Omegaversion because you changed the Omega code and forgot to increase the version number? :) Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-3373112 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:reinhard.kotucha@web.de ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 11/30/2010 09:01 AM, Hans Hagen wrote:

...

Do you propose to drop \Omegaversion because you changed the Omega code and forgot to increase the version number? :)

The Omega code is not so much 'changed', but lots of bits of it have been removed by now, and especially there are no translation process any more. What is left is: * the directions (\textdir, \bodydir ...) * the 16-bit character extensions (\omathchar, \odelimiter, ...) * local paragraph settings (\localleftbox ...) * character ghosts (\leftghost, \rightghost) * "Omega Font Metrics" support at level 0 * the page settings (\pageheight, \pagewidth, ...) * character information access (\chardp, \charht, ..) * version primitives (\Alephversion ...) For each of these ... * the handling directions may change incompatibly in the near future (depending on how the updated direction handling will work after all tracker items have been processed) * the 16-bit math characters are ugly, and I would to deprecate them * local paragraph settings are likely to change after some of the paragraph handling trackers have been processed. * character ghosts are superceded by opentype fonts, so only make sense with TFM/OFM files * OFMs hardly exist * page settings are also provided via the pdftex primitives * character info access is also provided via etex primitives, and via lua. All in all, I don't think luatex 1.0 would still be compatible with Omega/Aleph even if it still does some of the same things, so removing the version primitives seems a reasonable thing to do. Best wishes, Taco