I just took a look and found a `tablecenterthingy.tex` that I forgot to remove... :)
Skillmon
But also if I want to test quick ideas. Currently there are files named `expkv-opt-tests.tex` and `expkvspeedup.tex`, or a test file for `enverb` which is called `evenrb.tex`, and a one-off document that's called `text_<name of my daughter>_geburtstag_2024.tex` which I created for her invitations.
It's mostly for questions, and the files are usually named `tablethingy.tex` if the question is about tables. And usually I delete the files, there are some left overs when I forget to delete them or when I find the code interesting. Interesting ones are (usually) renamed, everything else gets emptied if I encounter a file I forgot to remove for something that coincidently has the same name.
Oh!!! I am sorry, I figured it out. This had nothing to do with the upgrade. I had copied my configuration file from another system and (of course) it had a different path. I changed it and now it works fine. Sorry for the noise.
I have a fully updated and working (from terminal) TeX Live 2024. I updated my system with a full upgrade command and suddenly my editor (GNU Emacs) complains about not being able to find the path. The files still compile from terminal, but not from the editor. Has anyone faced something like this before? Any guesses what the issue could be?
generally your hooks should start with the package name. In some special cases you can declare a generic hook like cmd/duck/before, e.g. if you want to move that into your command in a better place (or if you simply want to prevent the use of the generic hook).
~~~~
\documentclass{article}
\AddToHook{cmd/blub/before}{!!!}
\NewHook{cmd/blub/before}
\newcommand\blub{abc}
\begin{document}
\blub
\renewcommand\blub{abc\UseHook{cmd/blub/before}xxx}
\blub
\end{document}
~~~~
samcarter
If I wanted to use a hook in one specific macro, let's say `\duck`, would I name it after the package `\NewHook{tikzducks/body}` or something like `\NewHook{cmd/duck/body}`?
Too good. I was also not very happy with the placement of the (La)TeX from `hologos`. With `metalogox` it looks much better, but I would maybe steal the code just for the two-three commands I need regularly and use them locally rather than using the entire package.
but what does it have to do with metal? (I parsed this incorrectly, obviously)
samcarter
Package in the spotlight: [metalogox](https://www.ctan.org/pkg/metalogox)
(I've always disliked the spacing of `\LaTeX` in sans serif cm - e.g. used by beamer. Metalogox improves the spacing a bit...)
my personal opinion: as long as there are no security concerns (e.g. it still works with the current python version) I don't see a problem in using software that is no longer actively developed. I would think it would still make an interesting article.
My pleasure. I think it's a very nice idea to give a shout out to the software we like.
निरंजन
I, for example, quite often use [`expex`](https://ctan.org/pkg/expex) which is a very old package. Last release was around 8 years ago, but till date, its output is unmatched with that of other similar packages.
The maintainer replied: "That project is pretty inactive. It's not completely unmaintained though. If something is broken on e.g. a new Python version I'll fix it. But there's no new features planned. It's fairly complete though in my opinion, so you can still use it."
I found it very nice, it allows much faster compilation of your document because you can create all your plots parallelised and they integrate into your document absolutely seamless.
Last commit 6 months ago, last release 1 year 3 months ago, but the release before that was in 2020. One could say that development at least slowed down a lot, but maybe it's just stable enough for the authors' needs? Did you try reaching the authors/maintainers?
Prof. van Duck would have liked to write an article about PyLaTeX but he has just find out this: "We found indications that PyLaTeX is an Inactive project." Quack in despair!