Can I have a delimited macro with a literal # in the parameter text?





.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}







7















I'm trying to define a macro which grabs everything until the next # (parameter token).

My twisted imagination wants something like this:



deftest#1###2{(#1)[#2]}
test hello#{world}


to grab hello in #1 (delimited by #) and world in #2 (brace delimited) and then print



(hello)[world]


However I'm failing (miserably) because no matter what combination of ## I try, TeX yells back:



! Parameters must be numbered consecutively.
<to be read again>
##
l.1 deftest#1##
#2{(#1)[#2]}
?


so I guess that simply writing down the # in there is not the way to go.



Is it possible somehow to have a #-delimited macro?










share|improve this question























  • why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:33











  • @DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:38













  • it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:45











  • "Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

    – Ulrich Diez
    May 17 at 20:26













  • @UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 20:35


















7















I'm trying to define a macro which grabs everything until the next # (parameter token).

My twisted imagination wants something like this:



deftest#1###2{(#1)[#2]}
test hello#{world}


to grab hello in #1 (delimited by #) and world in #2 (brace delimited) and then print



(hello)[world]


However I'm failing (miserably) because no matter what combination of ## I try, TeX yells back:



! Parameters must be numbered consecutively.
<to be read again>
##
l.1 deftest#1##
#2{(#1)[#2]}
?


so I guess that simply writing down the # in there is not the way to go.



Is it possible somehow to have a #-delimited macro?










share|improve this question























  • why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:33











  • @DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:38













  • it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:45











  • "Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

    – Ulrich Diez
    May 17 at 20:26













  • @UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 20:35














7












7








7


1






I'm trying to define a macro which grabs everything until the next # (parameter token).

My twisted imagination wants something like this:



deftest#1###2{(#1)[#2]}
test hello#{world}


to grab hello in #1 (delimited by #) and world in #2 (brace delimited) and then print



(hello)[world]


However I'm failing (miserably) because no matter what combination of ## I try, TeX yells back:



! Parameters must be numbered consecutively.
<to be read again>
##
l.1 deftest#1##
#2{(#1)[#2]}
?


so I guess that simply writing down the # in there is not the way to go.



Is it possible somehow to have a #-delimited macro?










share|improve this question














I'm trying to define a macro which grabs everything until the next # (parameter token).

My twisted imagination wants something like this:



deftest#1###2{(#1)[#2]}
test hello#{world}


to grab hello in #1 (delimited by #) and world in #2 (brace delimited) and then print



(hello)[world]


However I'm failing (miserably) because no matter what combination of ## I try, TeX yells back:



! Parameters must be numbered consecutively.
<to be read again>
##
l.1 deftest#1##
#2{(#1)[#2]}
?


so I guess that simply writing down the # in there is not the way to go.



Is it possible somehow to have a #-delimited macro?







macros tex-core






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked May 17 at 11:25









Phelype OleinikPhelype Oleinik

29.5k64998




29.5k64998













  • why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:33











  • @DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:38













  • it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:45











  • "Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

    – Ulrich Diez
    May 17 at 20:26













  • @UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 20:35



















  • why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:33











  • @DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:38













  • it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 11:45











  • "Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

    – Ulrich Diez
    May 17 at 20:26













  • @UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 20:35

















why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 11:33





why the # not simply test hello{world} ? :-)

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 11:33













@DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 11:38







@DavidCarlisle I was trying to scan the parameter text of a macro looking for its arguments one by one.

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 11:38















it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 11:45





it's hard (not really possible) to even find out how many arguments a macro has, tex.stackexchange.com/questions/305806/…

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 11:45













"Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

– Ulrich Diez
May 17 at 20:26







"Scan parameter text of a macro" -- if this means evaluating the result of meaningmacro: With meaning you don't have information about category codes. The meaning of the following macros looks the same but the 1st one does process two args and the 2nd one has just a delimiter and does not process args: 1) defmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} 2) catcode`#=12relaxdefmacro#1#2{#1 text #2} . Also, you are not bound to using hashes for denoting args. You can use any character after assigning catcode 6 to it. You can also use control-sequences/active chars let equal to catcode-6-chars.

– Ulrich Diez
May 17 at 20:26















@UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 20:35





@UlrichDiez Hm, now I see I did not phrase my question properly. What I wanted to achieve (and already changed my mind) was to scan a definition before the actual definition took place (something like scandefdeftest#1{something with #1}), not with meaning, so the hashes do have catcode 6 and, in this case, it doesn't matter which character they are because TeX will not allow this. Thanks for the input, though :-)

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 20:35










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















4














The TeXbook, page 203, says in the first doubly dangerous paragraph




Now that we have seen a number of examples, let’s look at the precise rules that govern TeX macros. Definitions have the general form



def⟨control sequence⟩⟨parameter text⟩{⟨replacement text⟩}



where the ⟨parameter text⟩ contains no braces, and where all occurrences of { and } in the ⟨replacement text⟩ are properly nested. Furthermore the # symbol has a special significance: In the ⟨parameter text⟩, the first appearance of # must be followed by 1, the next by 2, and so on; up to nine #’s are allowed.




There is no way for the parameter text to contain a (category code 6) #, because of the rule stated above.



As usual in the TeXbook, this is not the complete truth; in the second doubly dangerous bend on page 204 one reads




A special extension is allowed to these rules: If the very last character of the ⟨parameter text⟩ is #, so that this # is immediately followed by {, TeX will behave as if the { had been inserted at the right end of both the parameter text and the replacement text. For example, if you say ‘defa#1#{hbox to #1}’, the subsequent text ‘a3pt{x}’ will expand to ‘hbox to 3pt{x}’, because the argument
of a is delimited by a left brace.




However, this special extension has no favorable consequence towards your aim.






share|improve this answer


























  • Oh, must be followed :/

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:01











  • @PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:07






  • 1





    although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:11













  • @DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:15











  • There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:20



















4














You can't really do what you ask, but you can ignore the # while parsing the arguments, then get rid of it:



enter image description here



deftest#1#{deftmp##1{#11}zz}
defzz#1{(tmp{})[#1]}

test hello#{world}

bye





share|improve this answer
























  • “You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:58











  • @PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:13












Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491296%2fcan-i-have-a-delimited-macro-with-a-literal-in-the-parameter-text%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes








2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4














The TeXbook, page 203, says in the first doubly dangerous paragraph




Now that we have seen a number of examples, let’s look at the precise rules that govern TeX macros. Definitions have the general form



def⟨control sequence⟩⟨parameter text⟩{⟨replacement text⟩}



where the ⟨parameter text⟩ contains no braces, and where all occurrences of { and } in the ⟨replacement text⟩ are properly nested. Furthermore the # symbol has a special significance: In the ⟨parameter text⟩, the first appearance of # must be followed by 1, the next by 2, and so on; up to nine #’s are allowed.




There is no way for the parameter text to contain a (category code 6) #, because of the rule stated above.



As usual in the TeXbook, this is not the complete truth; in the second doubly dangerous bend on page 204 one reads




A special extension is allowed to these rules: If the very last character of the ⟨parameter text⟩ is #, so that this # is immediately followed by {, TeX will behave as if the { had been inserted at the right end of both the parameter text and the replacement text. For example, if you say ‘defa#1#{hbox to #1}’, the subsequent text ‘a3pt{x}’ will expand to ‘hbox to 3pt{x}’, because the argument
of a is delimited by a left brace.




However, this special extension has no favorable consequence towards your aim.






share|improve this answer


























  • Oh, must be followed :/

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:01











  • @PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:07






  • 1





    although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:11













  • @DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:15











  • There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:20
















4














The TeXbook, page 203, says in the first doubly dangerous paragraph




Now that we have seen a number of examples, let’s look at the precise rules that govern TeX macros. Definitions have the general form



def⟨control sequence⟩⟨parameter text⟩{⟨replacement text⟩}



where the ⟨parameter text⟩ contains no braces, and where all occurrences of { and } in the ⟨replacement text⟩ are properly nested. Furthermore the # symbol has a special significance: In the ⟨parameter text⟩, the first appearance of # must be followed by 1, the next by 2, and so on; up to nine #’s are allowed.




There is no way for the parameter text to contain a (category code 6) #, because of the rule stated above.



As usual in the TeXbook, this is not the complete truth; in the second doubly dangerous bend on page 204 one reads




A special extension is allowed to these rules: If the very last character of the ⟨parameter text⟩ is #, so that this # is immediately followed by {, TeX will behave as if the { had been inserted at the right end of both the parameter text and the replacement text. For example, if you say ‘defa#1#{hbox to #1}’, the subsequent text ‘a3pt{x}’ will expand to ‘hbox to 3pt{x}’, because the argument
of a is delimited by a left brace.




However, this special extension has no favorable consequence towards your aim.






share|improve this answer


























  • Oh, must be followed :/

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:01











  • @PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:07






  • 1





    although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:11













  • @DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:15











  • There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:20














4












4








4







The TeXbook, page 203, says in the first doubly dangerous paragraph




Now that we have seen a number of examples, let’s look at the precise rules that govern TeX macros. Definitions have the general form



def⟨control sequence⟩⟨parameter text⟩{⟨replacement text⟩}



where the ⟨parameter text⟩ contains no braces, and where all occurrences of { and } in the ⟨replacement text⟩ are properly nested. Furthermore the # symbol has a special significance: In the ⟨parameter text⟩, the first appearance of # must be followed by 1, the next by 2, and so on; up to nine #’s are allowed.




There is no way for the parameter text to contain a (category code 6) #, because of the rule stated above.



As usual in the TeXbook, this is not the complete truth; in the second doubly dangerous bend on page 204 one reads




A special extension is allowed to these rules: If the very last character of the ⟨parameter text⟩ is #, so that this # is immediately followed by {, TeX will behave as if the { had been inserted at the right end of both the parameter text and the replacement text. For example, if you say ‘defa#1#{hbox to #1}’, the subsequent text ‘a3pt{x}’ will expand to ‘hbox to 3pt{x}’, because the argument
of a is delimited by a left brace.




However, this special extension has no favorable consequence towards your aim.






share|improve this answer















The TeXbook, page 203, says in the first doubly dangerous paragraph




Now that we have seen a number of examples, let’s look at the precise rules that govern TeX macros. Definitions have the general form



def⟨control sequence⟩⟨parameter text⟩{⟨replacement text⟩}



where the ⟨parameter text⟩ contains no braces, and where all occurrences of { and } in the ⟨replacement text⟩ are properly nested. Furthermore the # symbol has a special significance: In the ⟨parameter text⟩, the first appearance of # must be followed by 1, the next by 2, and so on; up to nine #’s are allowed.




There is no way for the parameter text to contain a (category code 6) #, because of the rule stated above.



As usual in the TeXbook, this is not the complete truth; in the second doubly dangerous bend on page 204 one reads




A special extension is allowed to these rules: If the very last character of the ⟨parameter text⟩ is #, so that this # is immediately followed by {, TeX will behave as if the { had been inserted at the right end of both the parameter text and the replacement text. For example, if you say ‘defa#1#{hbox to #1}’, the subsequent text ‘a3pt{x}’ will expand to ‘hbox to 3pt{x}’, because the argument
of a is delimited by a left brace.




However, this special extension has no favorable consequence towards your aim.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 17 at 12:15

























answered May 17 at 11:59









egregegreg

748k8919583301




748k8919583301













  • Oh, must be followed :/

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:01











  • @PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:07






  • 1





    although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:11













  • @DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:15











  • There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:20



















  • Oh, must be followed :/

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:01











  • @PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:07






  • 1





    although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:11













  • @DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

    – egreg
    May 17 at 12:15











  • There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 12:20

















Oh, must be followed :/

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 12:01





Oh, must be followed :/

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 12:01













@PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

– egreg
May 17 at 12:07





@PhelypeOleinik Yes, not the weaker “should” or “ought to”.

– egreg
May 17 at 12:07




1




1





although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 12:11







although (not unusually for the texbook) that rule isn't actually completely true (you can follow the last # by { rather than a digit). So that dangerous bend on its own wouldn't be enough to confirm it wasn't possible (but it isn't possible:-)

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 12:11















@DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

– egreg
May 17 at 12:15





@DavidCarlisle Yes, I added the relevant quotation.

– egreg
May 17 at 12:15













There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 12:20





There is module 476 in tex.pdf, which I sort of understand (because I already know what it does (sort of)). It first looks for a left brace, if it's not then steps a counter t and if the grabbed token isn't equal to t the error message in the question is printed.

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 12:20













4














You can't really do what you ask, but you can ignore the # while parsing the arguments, then get rid of it:



enter image description here



deftest#1#{deftmp##1{#11}zz}
defzz#1{(tmp{})[#1]}

test hello#{world}

bye





share|improve this answer
























  • “You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:58











  • @PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:13
















4














You can't really do what you ask, but you can ignore the # while parsing the arguments, then get rid of it:



enter image description here



deftest#1#{deftmp##1{#11}zz}
defzz#1{(tmp{})[#1]}

test hello#{world}

bye





share|improve this answer
























  • “You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:58











  • @PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:13














4












4








4







You can't really do what you ask, but you can ignore the # while parsing the arguments, then get rid of it:



enter image description here



deftest#1#{deftmp##1{#11}zz}
defzz#1{(tmp{})[#1]}

test hello#{world}

bye





share|improve this answer













You can't really do what you ask, but you can ignore the # while parsing the arguments, then get rid of it:



enter image description here



deftest#1#{deftmp##1{#11}zz}
defzz#1{(tmp{})[#1]}

test hello#{world}

bye






share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered May 17 at 11:40









David CarlisleDavid Carlisle

510k4311591916




510k4311591916













  • “You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:58











  • @PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:13



















  • “You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

    – Phelype Oleinik
    May 17 at 11:58











  • @PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

    – David Carlisle
    May 17 at 12:13

















“You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 11:58





“You can't really do” is acceptable (although frustrating). Is there anywhere that explains this (not that I'm doubting you ;-)?

– Phelype Oleinik
May 17 at 11:58













@PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 12:13





@PhelypeOleinik egreg's answer shows some sort of documentation, although as i commented there the texbook often"clarifies" rules later so it is hard to use it as a definitive source, there is always tex-the-program.....

– David Carlisle
May 17 at 12:13


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491296%2fcan-i-have-a-delimited-macro-with-a-literal-in-the-parameter-text%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

Bunad