« first day (5024 days earlier)      last day (130 days later) » 

cfr
cfr
00:45
Dwi'n dim ond profi.
Weird? Odd.
But I can never see anything I say mysel
Diflannu
 
7 hours later…
07:35
New l3kernel release today
08:00
@JosephWright oh no :)
 
3 hours later…
10:40
James Bond went grey because he had no time to dye.
3
Any reason why \prop_log:N does not write to the terminal as well? I'd like to be able to see it in the terminal but it should not stop the complication (like \prop_show:N does), at least there is a log version.
10:53
@daleif Because the terminal is 'precious'
@daleif it would with \tracingonline=1 I guess.
@DavidCarlisle no that doesn't work.
@UlrikeFischer yes i was just wondering about that.
@JosephWright ooh Tolkien
11:11
@UlrikeFischer hmm but it's just \cs_new_protected:Npn \prop_log:N { \@@_show:NN \msg_log:nneeee } so you could copy that replacing @@ by prop and msg_log by msg_term @daleif
@PauloCereda There are two competing translations of the books to Swedish. Apparently, the one making subs for the movie looked at the one we do not read. Confusing.
@DavidCarlisle or be modern and do \msg_redirect_class:nn { log } { term }
@mickep oh no
put some sunflower oil on the pasta like a real Italian
@DavidCarlisle THat complains that \prop_log:NN is not known (I think). Ulrikes works well.
11:16
@UlrikeFischer yes but that would do them all (although same would have been true of tracingonline so OK)
@daleif yes I meant define a prop_term or some such (or redewfine show by removing "new" from the definition
@DavidCarlisle You can pick out specific messages ...
@JosephWright you can, but you can also copy one line out the sources and make a similar command:-)
I tried \cs_new_protected:Npn \prop_term:N { \prop_show:NN \msg_term:nneeee }, and one of them is not defined. Never mind, does not matter here.
@daleif @DavidCarlisle said \__prop_show:NN (with @@ in it)
@daleif anyway if you do what I suggest, @JosephWright and @UlrikeFischer will be cross with you for abusing expl3, so simpler to do what @UlrikeFischer says;-)
11:21
@DavidCarlisle This class is not public, so ....
they'll never know
@DavidCarlisle :)
12:11
pretty bad, isn't it?
12:27
@samcarter ooh I see a mouse piloting a boat :)
@PauloCereda ... maybe it is a duckboat?
@samcarter ooh
13:18
Has someone smarter than me already given a look at tex.stackexchange.com/q/723709/82917? I tried looking into it but I am very puzzled.
@campa that came up recently the nls file has an unmatched \begingroup I'll see if I can find....
@DavidCarlisle Ah, now I see. I noticed the explicit \begingroup, but hadn't seen that every \nompageref introduces an \endgroup.
@campa I had a quick look at the time of the first question, the begingroup endgroup use in the package seems to make no sense, i made some adjustments to apparently mis-matched cases but always got an error somewhere so gave up
 
2 hours later…
15:09
@DavidCarlisle isn't that simply a user error? They use \nomenclature for the same symbol twice. I don't think that the package supports that
 
3 hours later…
17:58
@UlrikeFischer I have no idea, I have never used the package, but the nls files it generates are very weird with unmatched \begingroup at the start of each item that's supposed to match some end group added somewhere

« first day (5024 days earlier)      last day (130 days later) »