Re: Comments on \defineshortcut

["Giuseppe Bilotta" <oblomov@freemail.it>]

[the patch works perfect; about the other question:]

>
> >Second problem: ligs fail in some cases (if I \defineshortcut
> >[--][o][style\overstrike] then the following lines misses a few beats:
> >
> >it seems -o:to work- well--does it?---really?
>
> see it this way: in --- the first - picks up everything uuntil the next -
> so the third - triggers a new - which cannot find its matching -
>
> >Third problem: math fails too:
> >>
> >$(a+b)/(a-c-d)_{a+b}$
> >with -- and ++ defined as shortcuts fail (not on parenthesis, if I make those
> >active too; depends on the fact that parenthesis are delimiters in math
> mode?)
>
> Hm, this works ok here, unless of course you redefine + a few times since
> then the last meaning is used.
>

I checked out--the problem was the "pending" - form the --- on the previous
line.

Anyway, note that -- should *not* just disappear, since -- is not a shorcut, but
"-o:<whatever text>-" is; so maybe in these circumstances (when "pure" shortcut
is note defined, but it is used) charactes should revert to their original
meaning:

In the previous example:

-o:overstriken text- should be overstriked, but -- and --- should work normally
(getting ligs and alike);

with \defineshortcut[**][b][style=bold]:

*b:bolded text* should be bold, but ** and *** should work normally (no ligs in
this case);

> PS. Actually i implemented shortcuts as a kind of joke.

Then maybe such fuss is not to be wasted time upon.

Giuseppe Bilotta

Using Microsoft products is like
having sex without condoms---but
much less pleasurable