You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In issue 32 the point was made that using pdfTeX as an engine is not the same as PDF output. We don't currently have a test for the later. I'm not clear on whether we'll want one long-term (this depends on how output mode is selected), but we should perhaps have something at least in package mode. \mode_if_output_pdf:(TF) might fit with other names we currently use.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think that the \mode_ prefix is good, so I like the name. If we want to rename \luatex_if_engine:(TF), it could become \mode_if_engine_luatex:(TF), but that's another question.
See also #233: at present the working name (in my head!) is something like \runtime_if_output_pdf:(TF)/\runtime_if_output_dvi:TF, dependent on final decision on module name here and what people think about the 'payload' naming.
In issue 32 the point was made that using pdfTeX as an engine is not the same as PDF output. We don't currently have a test for the later. I'm not clear on whether we'll want one long-term (this depends on how output mode is selected), but we should perhaps have something at least in package mode.
\mode_if_output_pdf:(TF)
might fit with other names we currently use.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: