On 19/10/2022 10:57, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
Juan Manuel Macías writes:
Today I have tried with the latest version of tabularray (2022C, the one
I tried yesterday was 2022A, included in TeX Live 2022), and the bad
results persist. Also, it now returns a compile error when an \empty
precedes a \hline. I suspect this package does a pretty drastic
redefinition of \\. The [0pt] option still works fine here, though.
Then [0pt] should it be. At least for now, before we have a cleaner
solution.
It seems when I had a look into latex.ltx first time, I confused which
branch is executed when length is less than or equal to zero and decided
that it is the heavier \@xargarraycr. Actually \@yargarraycr do not
really worry me, so degree of my objection concerning \\[0pt]
significantly decreased.
\def\@argarraycr[#1]{%
\ifnum0=`{\fi}${}\ifdim #1>\z@ \@xargarraycr{#1}\else
\@yargarraycr{#1}\fi}
\def\@xargarraycr#1{\@tempdima #1\advance\@tempdima \dp \@arstrutbox
\vrule \@height\z@ \@depth\@tempdima \@width\z@ \cr}
\def\@yargarraycr#1{\cr\noalign{\vskip #1}}
I have realized that
| / | < | > |
| | a | b |
| | @@latex:\noalign{\vskip 1em}@@ c | d |
is not a workaround to increase local interval between rows. It may
cause disrupted vertical rules. Another recipe should be used:
| / | < | > |
| | a | b @@latex:\rule[-1em]{0pt}{1em}@@ |
| | c | d |
I believe that a more convenient way to override [0pt] to some other
length for particular row should exist, but I have no idea which syntax
should be used.
As to tabulararray, I still consider it as an experimental package.
Perhaps I will install a more modern container. I am curious what code
handles \\[0pt]. Likely I should read docs to get impression related to
design goals and approaches to implement them. The bug tracker of the
project looks like an appropriate place to ask a question concerning \\
variant safe for dumb exporters.
For a while I have the following question. Is \\{} have the same effect
on tabularray parser as \\\empty?
