Re: [O] words starting with call_ confuse C-c C-c and export

[Eric Schulte]

Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello,
>
> Eric Schulte <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Nicolas Goaziou <address@hidden> writes:
>
>>> It would solve the current problem, but there are still many problematic
>>> characters allowed (e.g., commas, curly brackets). I think there's no
>>> point in allowing "call_{i=1}()" as a valid inline Babel call.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, I don't think it's a real limitation to use alphanumeric
>>> characters (and hyphen) only for a function name. I would even require
>>> an alphabetic character as the first char, to avoid calls like:
>>> "call_1()".
>>>
>>
>> I often use "/" in function names, and in general I'd prefer not to
>> remove characters (e.g., "{") unless there is a specific reason.
>
> I think there's a specific reason to disallow naming a function "{i=1}":
> it is too close to underline syntax. We should make syntax less prone to
> ambiguity (see recent thread about underline and subscript) ; this
> doesn't help. Think also about call_~my-verbatim-function-name~(),
> call_@@latex:my-export-snippet@@()...
>
> We're talking about function names, not free-form text, so limitations
> are understandable. For example, macro names only allow alphanumeric
> characters or hyphens and have to start with an alphabetic character.
>

Having considered this, unless there are user objections I'd be happy
limiting function names to the same restricted alphabet as macro names.

This would be a breaking change though, and should be mentioned as such
in the notes.

Best,

>
> I suggest to select a few symbols allowed in names (e.g., "/") as
> a starter. It is always possible to discuss on a case by case basis if
> other symbols should be added.
>
>
> Regards,

-- 
Eric Schulte
https://cs.unm.edu/~eschulte
PGP: 0x614CA05D