Re: problem with texexec and inline metapost

["Eckhart Guthöhrlein" <eckhart_guthoehrlein@public.uni-hamburg.de>]

At 12:57 14.07.2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Eckhart Guthöhrlein wrote:
> >
> > But what about having texexec/perl calculate the checksums, writing them to
> > an auxiliary file, and tex just reading them? And in any case, one can be
> > sure that the mp code will not change during the same call to texexec (or
> > can there be exceptions?), so that if, say, three tex runs are necessary,
> > one run of mp would be sufficient. Setting some switch may be sufficient to
> > achieve this.
>
>It *can* change with a texexec, imagine using the page number in the MP
>code, for example. More serious problem: even if texexec calculates the
>checksum, then how would the TeX macro code know its status without
>first
>calculating a checksum itself? It needs to compare two checksums: one
>from
>this run against the one from the previous run.

So, why not keeping two checksums in the aux file? No, no, all right, I 
admit that I did not think beyond my simple applications. Metapost is 
actually quite fast, so I must agree with yoz that the additional gain of 
speed (maybe even not...) is probably not worth the trouble. And it is 
likely that there will be more problems than positive effects and than I 
can imagine... So let's forget about it, it was just an idea, coming up 
because my - until recently - preferred method texexec --automprun does not 
work as expected at the moment (see the other thread).

Eckhart