[metapost] augment drawoptions

[Dan Luecking]

At 02:10 AM 4/15/2008, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>Stephan Hennig wrote:
> > Taco Hoekwater schrieb:
> >> Stephan Hennig wrote:
> >>> As can be seen macros _op_stack_A to _op_stack_C are defined, but empty,
> >>> whereas _op_stack_D is of type "tag".  Is there a way to completely
> >>> remove a macro, i.e., make an identifier a tag again?
> >>    save <macro>;
> >
> > But does that save memory?
>
>Only at top level, true. A primitive could be provided to remove
>values without saving them, but in that case something that saves
>in a non-destructive way may be useful too. Comments welcome.

Doesn't
   numeric <macro>;
work? Doesn't that make the macro unknown?
Not sure what it does if a vardef-ed macro has
suffix parameters.

It shouldn't use up any memory saving its old meaning.
All unknowns are numeric tags anyway, so it doesn't
give <macro> any characteristics it wouldn't otherwise have.


Dan


Daniel H. Luecking
Department of Mathematical Sciences
University of Arkansas
"Dubito ergo cogito, cogito ergo sum" --Descarte