Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells escribió:
Dear Javier, copy all --
Because it is difficult for me to think in Russian (or even in Greek), would it be possible for you to give an example of your desired behaviour using (say) French. I /imagine/ that what you are saying is that if we take é (<e-acute>) as an example of a character that could not normally form a part of a control sequence, you would like to be able to do the following :
\cscode `\é = 1 \catcode `\é = \active \def é{\'e} \def \née {born}
and that this solution is preferred to
\catcode `\é = \catcode `\e \def \née {born}
because the latter does not allow the
\catcode `\é = \active \def é{\'e}
functionality that \cscode does. Is this correct ?
** Phil. -------- because the latter has implications
Yes, I mean exactly that. I chose the example of Russian because in a language that uses the Latin script, as is the case of French or Spanish, it really isn't that annoying not to be able to use accented leters or some particular letter of the alphabet (\~n, \c c, ...), but if you are using another script it is very likely that you need all the letters of your alphabet to be active, and so you are forced to use the latin alphabet to build the names of control sequences. You said that it is difficult for you to think in Russian. Well, neither can I, but people using TeX in those countries **must** think in another alphabet, and it would be really an improvement if they were able to write control sequences using their natural script. -- Javier A.