Mixing
What is the difference between unexpanded and protected in ConTeXt?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
EDIT: It turns out that unexpanded in ConTeXt is different from unexpanded in ε-TeX, so the earlier description doesn't apply. I'll update the question accordingly.
From the ε-TeX manual:
- Protected macros (defined with the
protectedprefix) are not expanded when building an expanded token list (foredef,xdef,message,errmessage,special,mark,marksor when writing the token list forwriteto a file) or when looking ahead in an alignment fornoalignoromit.
From the ConTeXt Wiki:
When expansion of a macro gives problems we can precede it by
unexpanded, like so:
unexpandeddefsomecommand... ... ...
This will prevent the macro from being expanded in places where no typesetting occurs, like when strings are written to the tuo file.
In practice, I've seen the two used in seemingly the exact same situations, although unexpandeddef... seems more common. Is there any notable difference between the two that I should be aware of?
context expansion e-tex protected-macro
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
EDIT: It turns out that unexpanded in ConTeXt is different from unexpanded in ε-TeX, so the earlier description doesn't apply. I'll update the question accordingly.
From the ε-TeX manual:
- Protected macros (defined with the
protectedprefix) are not expanded when building an expanded token list (foredef,xdef,message,errmessage,special,mark,marksor when writing the token list forwriteto a file) or when looking ahead in an alignment fornoalignoromit.
From the ConTeXt Wiki:
When expansion of a macro gives problems we can precede it by
unexpanded, like so:
unexpandeddefsomecommand... ... ...
This will prevent the macro from being expanded in places where no typesetting occurs, like when strings are written to the tuo file.
In practice, I've seen the two used in seemingly the exact same situations, although unexpandeddef... seems more common. Is there any notable difference between the two that I should be aware of?
context expansion e-tex protected-macro
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
unexpandeddefis only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.
– egreg
6 hours ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
up vote
7
down vote
favorite
EDIT: It turns out that unexpanded in ConTeXt is different from unexpanded in ε-TeX, so the earlier description doesn't apply. I'll update the question accordingly.
From the ε-TeX manual:
- Protected macros (defined with the
protectedprefix) are not expanded when building an expanded token list (foredef,xdef,message,errmessage,special,mark,marksor when writing the token list forwriteto a file) or when looking ahead in an alignment fornoalignoromit.
From the ConTeXt Wiki:
When expansion of a macro gives problems we can precede it by
unexpanded, like so:
unexpandeddefsomecommand... ... ...
This will prevent the macro from being expanded in places where no typesetting occurs, like when strings are written to the tuo file.
In practice, I've seen the two used in seemingly the exact same situations, although unexpandeddef... seems more common. Is there any notable difference between the two that I should be aware of?
context expansion e-tex protected-macro
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
EDIT: It turns out that unexpanded in ConTeXt is different from unexpanded in ε-TeX, so the earlier description doesn't apply. I'll update the question accordingly.
From the ε-TeX manual:
- Protected macros (defined with the
protectedprefix) are not expanded when building an expanded token list (foredef,xdef,message,errmessage,special,mark,marksor when writing the token list forwriteto a file) or when looking ahead in an alignment fornoalignoromit.
From the ConTeXt Wiki:
When expansion of a macro gives problems we can precede it by
unexpanded, like so:
unexpandeddefsomecommand... ... ...
This will prevent the macro from being expanded in places where no typesetting occurs, like when strings are written to the tuo file.
In practice, I've seen the two used in seemingly the exact same situations, although unexpandeddef... seems more common. Is there any notable difference between the two that I should be aware of?
context expansion e-tex protected-macro
context expansion e-tex protected-macro
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 18 mins ago
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
asked 12 hours ago
G. S.
484
484
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
G. S. is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
2
unexpandeddefis only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.
– egreg
6 hours ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2
unexpandeddefis only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.
– egreg
6 hours ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago
2
2
unexpandeddef is only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.– egreg
6 hours ago
unexpandeddef is only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.– egreg
6 hours ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
This is comparing the etex primitive unexpanded not the context macro of the same name. The Question has since been clarified that the context command was what was intended.
They are not really comparable:
protected is a modifier of def and makes the resulting token have an internal flag set so that its expansion is suppressed in certain contexts. So it is a property of the command.
unexpanded is used to prevent the expansion of a token list so it is a property of the context not of the commands that are in it.
Of course there is some overlap, if you are writing to a file and need to prevent expansion then you could (as in classic latex) declare that fragile commands will fail and so arrange that all definitions are made with protect so there are less fragile commands. Or you could use unexpanded and prevent all expansion whether or not the commands are made with protect, this would also stop any user defined commands expanding to their replacements which may or may not be what you want, depending on circumstances.
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works likeedeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzzthat is it does the same asthetoks@in anedefwithout the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.
– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitiveprotectedto the context macrounexpandedrather than to the etex primitiveunexpandedThat might explain the question:-)
– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use theunexpandedprimitive in ConTeXt you have to usenormalunexpanded.
– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt'sunexpandedmacro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to addunexpandedornormalprotectedbefore definitions, especially sincesetuvalue& similar commands defined insyst-aux.mkivusenormalprotectedwhile most other uses ofdefI've seen in the source code useunexpanded.
– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If I compile with context the following
showunexpanded
I get
> unexpanded=protected
tex error > tex error on line 1 in file /Users/enrico2013/provaccia/sep2018/tttsssttt.tex: ?
l.1 showunexpanded
1 >> showunexpanded
2
In /usr/local/texlive/2018/texmf-dist/tex/context/base/mkiv/syst-aux.mkiv, line 61 reads
letunexpandednormalprotected
If I add shownormalprotected, then the output is
> normalprotected=protected
Of course, the meaning of unexpanded could be reassigned, but macros defined when unexpanded has that meaning will be protected (in e-TeX lingo).
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
I did look throughsyst-aux.mkivand found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I useunexpandedvs.normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.
– G. S.
31 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
6
down vote
This is comparing the etex primitive unexpanded not the context macro of the same name. The Question has since been clarified that the context command was what was intended.
They are not really comparable:
protected is a modifier of def and makes the resulting token have an internal flag set so that its expansion is suppressed in certain contexts. So it is a property of the command.
unexpanded is used to prevent the expansion of a token list so it is a property of the context not of the commands that are in it.
Of course there is some overlap, if you are writing to a file and need to prevent expansion then you could (as in classic latex) declare that fragile commands will fail and so arrange that all definitions are made with protect so there are less fragile commands. Or you could use unexpanded and prevent all expansion whether or not the commands are made with protect, this would also stop any user defined commands expanding to their replacements which may or may not be what you want, depending on circumstances.
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works likeedeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzzthat is it does the same asthetoks@in anedefwithout the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.
– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitiveprotectedto the context macrounexpandedrather than to the etex primitiveunexpandedThat might explain the question:-)
– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use theunexpandedprimitive in ConTeXt you have to usenormalunexpanded.
– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt'sunexpandedmacro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to addunexpandedornormalprotectedbefore definitions, especially sincesetuvalue& similar commands defined insyst-aux.mkivusenormalprotectedwhile most other uses ofdefI've seen in the source code useunexpanded.
– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
This is comparing the etex primitive unexpanded not the context macro of the same name. The Question has since been clarified that the context command was what was intended.
They are not really comparable:
protected is a modifier of def and makes the resulting token have an internal flag set so that its expansion is suppressed in certain contexts. So it is a property of the command.
unexpanded is used to prevent the expansion of a token list so it is a property of the context not of the commands that are in it.
Of course there is some overlap, if you are writing to a file and need to prevent expansion then you could (as in classic latex) declare that fragile commands will fail and so arrange that all definitions are made with protect so there are less fragile commands. Or you could use unexpanded and prevent all expansion whether or not the commands are made with protect, this would also stop any user defined commands expanding to their replacements which may or may not be what you want, depending on circumstances.
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works likeedeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzzthat is it does the same asthetoks@in anedefwithout the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.
– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitiveprotectedto the context macrounexpandedrather than to the etex primitiveunexpandedThat might explain the question:-)
– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use theunexpandedprimitive in ConTeXt you have to usenormalunexpanded.
– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt'sunexpandedmacro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to addunexpandedornormalprotectedbefore definitions, especially sincesetuvalue& similar commands defined insyst-aux.mkivusenormalprotectedwhile most other uses ofdefI've seen in the source code useunexpanded.
– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
6
down vote
up vote
6
down vote
This is comparing the etex primitive unexpanded not the context macro of the same name. The Question has since been clarified that the context command was what was intended.
They are not really comparable:
protected is a modifier of def and makes the resulting token have an internal flag set so that its expansion is suppressed in certain contexts. So it is a property of the command.
unexpanded is used to prevent the expansion of a token list so it is a property of the context not of the commands that are in it.
Of course there is some overlap, if you are writing to a file and need to prevent expansion then you could (as in classic latex) declare that fragile commands will fail and so arrange that all definitions are made with protect so there are less fragile commands. Or you could use unexpanded and prevent all expansion whether or not the commands are made with protect, this would also stop any user defined commands expanding to their replacements which may or may not be what you want, depending on circumstances.
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
This is comparing the etex primitive unexpanded not the context macro of the same name. The Question has since been clarified that the context command was what was intended.
They are not really comparable:
protected is a modifier of def and makes the resulting token have an internal flag set so that its expansion is suppressed in certain contexts. So it is a property of the command.
unexpanded is used to prevent the expansion of a token list so it is a property of the context not of the commands that are in it.
Of course there is some overlap, if you are writing to a file and need to prevent expansion then you could (as in classic latex) declare that fragile commands will fail and so arrange that all definitions are made with protect so there are less fragile commands. Or you could use unexpanded and prevent all expansion whether or not the commands are made with protect, this would also stop any user defined commands expanding to their replacements which may or may not be what you want, depending on circumstances.
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
edited 1 min ago
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
answered 6 hours ago
David Carlisle
471k3811001829
471k3811001829
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works likeedeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzzthat is it does the same asthetoks@in anedefwithout the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.
– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitiveprotectedto the context macrounexpandedrather than to the etex primitiveunexpandedThat might explain the question:-)
– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use theunexpandedprimitive in ConTeXt you have to usenormalunexpanded.
– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt'sunexpandedmacro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to addunexpandedornormalprotectedbefore definitions, especially sincesetuvalue& similar commands defined insyst-aux.mkivusenormalprotectedwhile most other uses ofdefI've seen in the source code useunexpanded.
– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
add a comment |Â
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works likeedeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzzthat is it does the same asthetoks@in anedefwithout the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.
– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitiveprotectedto the context macrounexpandedrather than to the etex primitiveunexpandedThat might explain the question:-)
– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use theunexpandedprimitive in ConTeXt you have to usenormalunexpanded.
– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt'sunexpandedmacro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to addunexpandedornormalprotectedbefore definitions, especially sincesetuvalue& similar commands defined insyst-aux.mkivusenormalprotectedwhile most other uses ofdefI've seen in the source code useunexpanded.
– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works like
edeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzz that is it does the same as thetoks@ in an edef without the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
@G.S. no that's a syntax error unexpanded works like
edeffoozzz unexpanded... scarymacrohere.. zzz that is it does the same as thetoks@ in an edef without the need for using a toks register. It is unrelated to definitions.– David Carlisle
30 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitive
protected to the context macro unexpanded rather than to the etex primitive unexpanded That might explain the question:-)– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
Oh I see from comments under the question you are comparing the etex primitive
protected to the context macro unexpanded rather than to the etex primitive unexpanded That might explain the question:-)– David Carlisle
28 mins ago
To use the
unexpanded primitive in ConTeXt you have to use normalunexpanded.– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
To use the
unexpanded primitive in ConTeXt you have to use normalunexpanded.– Wolfgang Schuster
24 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt's
unexpanded macro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to add unexpanded or normalprotected before definitions, especially since setuvalue & similar commands defined in syst-aux.mkiv use normalprotected while most other uses of def I've seen in the source code use unexpanded.– G. S.
19 mins ago
@WolfgangSchuster Thanks, but it turns out I actually meant to ask about ConTeXt's
unexpanded macro (I've updated the question). Mostly I've been indecisive on whether to add unexpanded or normalprotected before definitions, especially since setuvalue & similar commands defined in syst-aux.mkiv use normalprotected while most other uses of def I've seen in the source code use unexpanded.– G. S.
19 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
@G.S. You should ask these questions on the ConTeXt list because only Hans Hagen can give you an answer for this.
– Wolfgang Schuster
16 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If I compile with context the following
showunexpanded
I get
> unexpanded=protected
tex error > tex error on line 1 in file /Users/enrico2013/provaccia/sep2018/tttsssttt.tex: ?
l.1 showunexpanded
1 >> showunexpanded
2
In /usr/local/texlive/2018/texmf-dist/tex/context/base/mkiv/syst-aux.mkiv, line 61 reads
letunexpandednormalprotected
If I add shownormalprotected, then the output is
> normalprotected=protected
Of course, the meaning of unexpanded could be reassigned, but macros defined when unexpanded has that meaning will be protected (in e-TeX lingo).
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
I did look throughsyst-aux.mkivand found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I useunexpandedvs.normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.
– G. S.
31 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If I compile with context the following
showunexpanded
I get
> unexpanded=protected
tex error > tex error on line 1 in file /Users/enrico2013/provaccia/sep2018/tttsssttt.tex: ?
l.1 showunexpanded
1 >> showunexpanded
2
In /usr/local/texlive/2018/texmf-dist/tex/context/base/mkiv/syst-aux.mkiv, line 61 reads
letunexpandednormalprotected
If I add shownormalprotected, then the output is
> normalprotected=protected
Of course, the meaning of unexpanded could be reassigned, but macros defined when unexpanded has that meaning will be protected (in e-TeX lingo).
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
I did look throughsyst-aux.mkivand found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I useunexpandedvs.normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.
– G. S.
31 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
If I compile with context the following
showunexpanded
I get
> unexpanded=protected
tex error > tex error on line 1 in file /Users/enrico2013/provaccia/sep2018/tttsssttt.tex: ?
l.1 showunexpanded
1 >> showunexpanded
2
In /usr/local/texlive/2018/texmf-dist/tex/context/base/mkiv/syst-aux.mkiv, line 61 reads
letunexpandednormalprotected
If I add shownormalprotected, then the output is
> normalprotected=protected
Of course, the meaning of unexpanded could be reassigned, but macros defined when unexpanded has that meaning will be protected (in e-TeX lingo).
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
If I compile with context the following
showunexpanded
I get
> unexpanded=protected
tex error > tex error on line 1 in file /Users/enrico2013/provaccia/sep2018/tttsssttt.tex: ?
l.1 showunexpanded
1 >> showunexpanded
2
In /usr/local/texlive/2018/texmf-dist/tex/context/base/mkiv/syst-aux.mkiv, line 61 reads
letunexpandednormalprotected
If I add shownormalprotected, then the output is
> normalprotected=protected
Of course, the meaning of unexpanded could be reassigned, but macros defined when unexpanded has that meaning will be protected (in e-TeX lingo).
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
answered 35 mins ago
egreg
689k8518333082
689k8518333082
I did look throughsyst-aux.mkivand found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I useunexpandedvs.normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.
– G. S.
31 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I did look throughsyst-aux.mkivand found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I useunexpandedvs.normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.
– G. S.
31 mins ago
I did look through
syst-aux.mkiv and found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I use unexpanded vs. normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.– G. S.
31 mins ago
I did look through
syst-aux.mkiv and found that line, but given David Carlisle's answer and the fact that I get different errors when I use unexpanded vs. normalprotected, I'm no longer so sure that they're the same, or whether the ε-TeX definition is still relevant.– G. S.
31 mins ago
add a comment |Â
G. S. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
G. S. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
G. S. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
G. S. is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f455101%2fwhat-is-the-difference-between-unexpanded-and-protected-in-context%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
2
unexpandeddefis only used by ConTeXt, which has different namings.– egreg
6 hours ago
I probably should have mentioned in the original post that I'm working with ConTeXt, sorry.
– G. S.
57 mins ago