Replies: 1 comment
-
Yup, this is something to think about! I have a couple of quick comments. For the foreseeable future, I think that engine selectors like Also, Tectonic does provide a new primitive called |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
LaTeX3 has some convenient tools for package writers. In
l3kernel -> l3sys
we have\c_sys_engine_str
, that holds the name of the engine (luatex, pdftex, xetex... etc); and\sys_if_engine_xetex_p:
, a boolean that is true on XeTeX-based engines.In LaTeX2 world, people resort to the
iftex
package.As
tectonic
evolves, it'll differentiate itself from XeTeX. Having a way to detect XeTeX-based is nice, and I'm not aware if we have a way of detectingtectonic
unequivocally. That would come handy for situations where writingtectonic
-specific conditional code is needed.Part of this is outside the project direct control: both LaTeX3 and other packages would need to add options to detect
tectonic
, but we could keep this issue to keep tabs on those.Internally the question is about how we could bridge that detection of
tectonic
: an internal macro only present when compiled with the engine? That would suffice for developers, regardless of other packages addingtectonic
to their features list.If suitable, I'm open to converting this into a Discussion.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions