Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

LaTeX: package extract abuses internal LaTeX interfaces and seems to be highly incompatible with modern versions of LaTeX #6217

Open
nsajko opened this issue Mar 29, 2023 · 3 comments

Comments

@nsajko
Copy link
Contributor

nsajko commented Mar 29, 2023

Heads up:

The LaTeX package extract, used in the draft document, seems to intrude into private parts of the implementation of LaTeX, with high potential of breaking stuff. Compiling std.pdf emits nasty warnings at the end of the process:

(\end occurred inside a group at level 1)

### semi simple group (level 1) entered at line 86 (\begingroup)
### bottom level 

Latexmk marks these warnings as "very important" (it might have been some different but equivalent wording, not sure).

See https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/605890/extract-package-causes-unfinished-group

the package redefines \begin and \end and completly breaks the new hook system of LaTeX, I wouldn't use it.

Write the author. He probably can use the new hooks instead of destroying them, or he could ask for real interfaces instead of redefining internal commands.

extract was created in 2005, long before any hook system was even discussed. So the new LaTeX destroyed the extract package.

@jwakely
Copy link
Member

jwakely commented Mar 29, 2023

The person who asked that question on stackexchange is the editor of the standard draft, so no heads up is needed :-)

The question was asked because it causes problems here, so it's already known.

@axelsommerfeldt
Copy link

Personally I find the term "abuses internal LaTeX interfaces" offensive; at the time when the extract package was written, "abusing" internal LaTeX interfaces was the only way to write such package in the first place. And blaming the author of the package for this does not really help either.

@tkoeppe
Copy link
Contributor

tkoeppe commented Nov 9, 2023

Perhaps we can replace the use of extract with some other package? How about https://ctan.org/pkg/scontents?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants