Texlive 2021 #1578
Texlive 2021 #1578
Conversation
lib/LaTeXML/Package/LaTeX.pool.ltxml
Outdated
| @@ -390,6 +389,7 @@ DefConstructorI(T_CS('\end{document}'), undef, sub { | |||
| # push(@boxes, Digest(Tokens(@$ops))); } | |||
| # NOTE: Don't flush gullet (tempting); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you remove the comment above that says Don't flush gullet (tempting); ? Seems outdated now :>
| # Expl3 "Experimental LaTeX 3" is no longer Experimental! | ||
| # It is beginning to be built into latex.ltx | ||
| # We WILL need a new strategy to keep up; probably based in some form | ||
| # of pre-read/pre-processed latex.ltx ! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe once they stabilize it fully we can make ourselves a new Latex3.pool file and forget about it for a little bit...
lib/LaTeXML/Package/xparse.sty.ltxml
Outdated
| # Newer versions of xparse *may* want to defer to one of these versioned files | ||
| # They are also acceptable for interpretation, but must avoid the de-versioning hack/fallback. | ||
| AssignValue("INTERPRETABLE_DEFINITIONS_xparse-2018-04-12.sty" => 1); | ||
| AssignValue("INTERPRETABLE_DEFINITIONS_xparse-2020-10-01.sty" => 1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The underscores followed by dashes...
Any chance I can sell you one something like the following later on?
PushValue("BLESSED_RAW_FILES", "xparse-2020-10-01.sty");Can wait until a future PR, but I wanted to mark it early to avoid being called inconsistent in my pedantry :>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No stripes with checks. Nobody can accuse you of not being consistently pedantic.
| # Newer versions of xparse *may* want to defer to one of these versioned files | ||
| # They are also acceptable for interpretation, but must avoid the de-versioning hack/fallback. | ||
| AssignMapping('INTERPRETABLE_SOURCES', 'xparse-2018-04-12.sty' => 1); | ||
| AssignMapping('INTERPRETABLE_SOURCES', 'xparse-2020-10-01.sty' => 1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be ridiculously pedantic, if you call \usepackage{xparse-2018-04-12} directly, you end up reading xparse.sty anyway. It's ok because of how xparse.sty is written, and clearly you are never supposed to call the versioned xparse directly. But I wonder if it is the right mechanism in general (I don't know how versioned packages are supposed to work in texlive).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Indeed, but explicitly pre-loading xparse-2018-04-12 only works because of the way xparse is written. What I like about @dginev's approach is that it doesn't rely on xparse internals, or even whether xparse-2018-04-12 is a "versioned" file (as opposed to simply a file with a funny name). And thus the technique will be more easily adapted to other such situations.
Ultimately, this whole issue is trying to work around what has to be called a hack (but a very useful hack) to prefer curated latexml-specific bindings over raw style files and not be mislead by the randomly "versioned" files typically found on arXiv. The hack tends to assume that files with names like "foo-.sty" are versioned, that is a snapshot or slightly tweaked version of "foo.sty". But sometimes a file is just a file.
This PR fixes some regressions (or lags, rather) for TeXLive 2021 (at least, the included tests).
It is an alternative to #1569 that I couldn't flesh out, without trying it out. (Sorry for stealing the glory) After experimentation, I pretty much ended up following @dginev's idea of recording the files that we are willing to interpret (so they don't hit the binding fallback). [Not yet a full API for this yet, but could evolve into something where we'd simply have a list of interpretable files, rather than trivial bindings]
Hopefully this will resolve #1566 and #1565 ? @xworld21, @flyn-org could you check?