Thank you, Bruno. I confess I speak not a word of Python, so my suggested changes were pure guesswork. Thank you very much for suggesting the proper replacements.
Philip Taylor -------- Bruno Le Floch wrote: > 512 doesn't look like the right number (in Python 2, 012345 is octal > 12345, not binary). It may be better to use 0o1000000000 which seems > to work in both Python 2 and 3. > > Bruno > -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
