[NTG-context] Re: unprotecting when defining in Lua

[Wolfgang Schuster <wolfgang.schuster.lists@gmail.com>]

Pablo Rodriguez via ntg-context schrieb am 29.04.2024 um 17:22:
> Dear list,
>
> I have the following sample:
>
>    \starttext
>    \startluacode
>      function document.test(str)
>        context(str)
>      end
>
>      interfaces.definecommand {
>        name = "testing",
>        protected = false,
>        macro = document.test,
>      }
>    \stopluacode
>
>    \meaningfull\testing
>
>    \def\test#1{#1}
>
>    \meaningfull\test
>    \stoptext
>
> Which is the right way to use "interfaces.definecommand" to get a simple
> command as in standard TeX?
>
> I mean, no a non \permanent or non \protected command.

You can't create unprotected command with interfaces.definecommand but 
this not a problem
because you can just use interfaces.implement to create your command 
which is then unprotected
by default. Using implement instead of definecommand doesn't matter 
because definecommand
is just a wrapper for the implement function with the option to create a 
environment.

Wolfgang

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman3/lists/ntg-context.ntg.nl
webpage  : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / https://context.aanhet.net (mirror)
archive  : https://github.com/contextgarden/context
wiki     : https://wiki.contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________