9

At the moment, there are 90 question tagged as , i.e. dealing with matters of "macro programming" (as in section R of the UK TeX FAQ). The site also features 37 questions tagged as , covering the do's and dont's of creating new commands (and modifying existing ones). But wait ... this is macro programming, isn't it?

Having tried to come up with a sensible distinction between the two "tag areas", I do believe there is none. The tag probably was created because \newcommand is the first thing a nascent macro programmer will encounter, although is the general term. In accordance with that, the "harder" programming questions (the ones that e.g. Joseph Wright and Will Robertson excel in answering) tend to be tagged with . (That is a distinction, but not a sensible one -- we don't feature tags like and .)

I suggest to define as a tag synonym for , i.e to merge into .

EDIT: I created a tag synonym suggestion.

EDIT 2: As an amendment, I propose to define as a tag synonym for . Please consider voting.

2

Having enough votes in the question and the proposed synonym too, I've taken the liberty to approve this synonym.

0

marks questions about defining macros with LaTeX, meaning also certain restrictions. In contrast, is about creating and using TeX's macros in general. So, perhaps this could remain distinguished.

But I admit that I thought the same when looking at the tag, also because I prefer descriptive tags over command name tags.

  • 4
    While I see what you mean, I think lockstep is correct here: the distinction is quite diffuse, and do we really need a tag for \newcommand? – Joseph Wright Feb 3 '11 at 20:41
  • For me it's also fine to merge. Mainly, I expressed thoughts also to support a discussion. I suggest, create and vote for a synonym, using the site's community features. If the synonym is established because of sufficient votes, I'll be glad to merge then. – Stefan Kottwitz Feb 3 '11 at 20:51
  • I created a tag synonym suggestion. (And as the creator, I'm not allowed to vote for it.) – lockstep Feb 3 '11 at 21:54
  • As you retagged the question to {status-completed}, do you intend to merge also {commands} into {macros} (see EDIT 2), or should this be a separate question? – lockstep Mar 6 '11 at 17:14
  • 1
    @lockstep: I will approve and merge the two tags, also because of the voting on this earlier question. At least, all {commands} tagged questions refer to {macros}, not to primitive control sequences, which at some time may have their own tag. – Stefan Kottwitz Mar 6 '11 at 17:54

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .