[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Guillemet
From: |
Benoit Bidoggia |
Subject: |
Re: Guillemet |
Date: |
Tue, 31 Jan 2006 11:08:27 +0100 |
Many thanks!
Best regards,
Benoit
2006/1/31, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden>:
> Salut,
>
> Benoit Bidoggia <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Hi, I thought that the empy braces were useful
> > when you do something like this:
>
> No, `{}' is like address@hidden', and address@hidden' does not simply "output
> nothing"
> (see the Expert Guide).
>
> > @LP
> > Le renard~: <<~Ah, monsieur ... beau~>>.
> >
> > I read that in French the "double signs", like
> > ", <<, >>, ?, !, ;, :, have to be preceded by
> > a fixed space, I use ~.
>
> Right. This is why I usually use (in French) something along the lines
> of:
>
> def "<<"
> precedence 10
> right word
> { { @Char guillemotleft }" "{ word } }
>
>
> def ">>"
> precedence 10
> left word
> { { word }" "{ @Char guillemotright } }
>
>
> Plus similar things for parentheses, colon, question marks, etc. But
> these are more intrusive and may yield various problems.
>
> For example, when one uses parentheses within an address@hidden' `xticks' or
> equivalent, one doesn't want the modified definitions of `(' and `)' to
> be taken into account because that would just break address@hidden'. I
> haven't
> found any way to solve this.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludovic.
>