Sun, 8 Oct 1995 19:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
> Ugh. I'd still prefer some language encouraging people to gravitate
> towards saying \input latex/foobar, etc.
> I don't think this is desirable, even if / becomes a universal directory
> separator (not likely to happen any time soon, anyway). Why should every
> <format> user have to preface each \input with `<format>'? Seems like
> TeX should be smart enough to do the Right Thing.
They shouldn't, nor would they be required to. If they just say \input foobar,
then TeX would take any file from within texmf/tex//, or any subtree if that
occurs first on the path. What I have in mind is that macro package writers
use this feature, e.g., somewhere within their \documentclass, \usepackage,
or \documentstyle macros.
Regarding the issue of directory separators, if / is not the directory
separator on a given O/S, then TeX (the program, not any macro packages lying
over it) should be smart enough to Do the Right Thing and translate the
syntax appropriately, much as #include does in C.
The problem with TeX being smart enough is that whatever smarts it has is
limited by what it knows. Making the input path dependent on the format in
use provides TeX with some information, but I can easily imagine circumstances
in which that is not enough, or even misleading.
--Paul Vojta, email@example.com