« first day (5064 days earlier)      last day (23 days later) » 

12:22 AM
@UlrikeFischer -- Yay! And the comma is even in the right place! David can't complain! (I missed your birthday. I hope it was happy.)
 
3 hours later…
3:34 AM
@UlrikeFischer What a perfect palindrome! Congrats!
 
3 hours later…
6:34 AM
@UlrikeFischer most impressive!
7:32 AM
@UlrikeFischer great one
@UlrikeFischer Nice, and belated birthday wishes
@mickep @daleif @Skillmon thanks ;-)
8:23 AM
@UlrikeFischer congratulations, good downvote management:-)
@DavidCarlisle some guy actually put me down by two more and I had to accept an answer of one of my questions to get back in track again ;-)
@UlrikeFischer now you just need to write two more bad answers to pick up a couple of downvotes to get on track for all the 4's
8:50 AM
@DavidCarlisle I have lots of time for this, I can at first worry about 345543 and 345678 ;-)
@UlrikeFischer 345678 doesn't look like a palindrome.
9:37 AM
Mar 7, 2017 at 21:14, by Ulrike Fischer
Royal flush!
9:49 AM
From which release was \pageref* supported in the kernel? 2022/06/01? Because then I don't need to check for hyperref I can just use \pageref* directly (I'd like to support at least a little back in time). (For something that will never be on CTAN)
That seems the correct date. Hadn't figured out the syntax in source2e
 
1 hour later…
11:04 AM
@daleif blame @UlrikeFischer:
2022-04-13  Ulrike Fischer <[email protected]>

	* ltxref.dtx:
	Added starred versions of \ref, \pageref and \Ref
	  Added expandable version for \pageref and \ref
	* ifthen.dtx:
	use new expandable version for \pageref and \ref
so yes that would be the 2022-06 release
 
1 hour later…
12:22 PM
is it just me or is that update wrong
\let\@kernel@ref\@kernel@sref
\let\@kernel@pageref\@kernel@spageref
Shouldn't they be reversed sref pointing to ref etc. (it is overwritten by a later one), just regarding users that are still on updated TL22.
@daleif why should it matter? In the initial state I simply want both to be the same, so I define one (sref in this case) and make the other a copy. And what do you mean by "overwritten by a later one"?
@UlrikeFischer From that code it did not look like \@kernel@sref was defined. Or at least I had not found it.
@daleif ? The definition is two lines above:
\def\@kernel@sref#1{\expandafter\@setref\csname r@#1\endcsname\@firstoffive{#1}}
\def\@kernel@spageref#1{\expandafter\@setref\csname r@#1\endcsname
                 \@secondoffive{#1}}
\let\@kernel@ref\@kernel@sref
\let\@kernel@pageref\@kernel@spageref
BTW: that table in tex.stackexchange.com/q/726262/3929, isn't that in TLC3 as well? I had it bookmarked in TLC2.
@UlrikeFischer Ahh, sorry, just found it strange to deffine the s versions first, but it makes sense as it is the other one hyperref changes.
So far I've only used TLC3 to look up stuff.
@daleif no, just checked it. TLC3 shows the right values:
12:37 PM
Ahh, found it, Vol II page 210
@UlrikeFischer "isn't that in TLC3 as well" was just referring to whether the table was in TLC3 (hadn't found it yet). It seems the same as in TLC2
@daleif yes, sorry I misunderstood the remark. But I had to check the content to be sure that we got it right ;-).
@UlrikeFischer I wrote that the wrong way. Would have been rather bad if that table was wrong. On the other hand very usefuil when explaning to people why \sin \circ f (x) comes out wrong (yes, I know the solution)
12:57 PM
@UlrikeFischer Copyright infringement noted
@Skillmon The site is hosted in the US .. fair use ;)
1:13 PM
@Skillmon which infringement? That I make a foto from one of my books or that the TLC3 retyped the table from the TeXbook?
@UlrikeFischer I suspect a table of that form doesn't reach the threshold for copyright - we have that at work with chemical schemes (at least one published makes this explicitly clear)
@JosephWright no.
@UlrikeFischer You could have avoided the potential issue by using the tex-by-topic approach of changing the numbers...
3
@DavidCarlisle Excellent idea!
@mickep one you and Hans have taken to heart
1:25 PM
@DavidCarlisle ConTeXt probably uses the values from TeXByTopic.
So, copyright infringement again :(
@mickep De Nederlandse manier
2:02 PM
@DavidCarlisle All Dutch people I know are very kind. :P
 
3 hours later…
5:22 PM
@UlrikeFischer was just a joke, sorry if it raised confusion.
@Skillmon German humor, it is the 🌭
@mickep the Germans have a very large and thick book of humour. It's just not funny.
5:53 PM
@Skillmon I knew it was a joke ;-). I only wondered about the target of the joke.
 
2 hours later…
7:57 PM
@UlrikeFischer was just me being stupid, no real target involved.
 
1 hour later…
9:01 PM
@mickep Add your mustard to it ... delicious!

« first day (5064 days earlier)      last day (23 days later) »