Code hook after variable setting actions in l3keys











up vote
7
down vote

favorite












I am trying out l3keys for the first time and I am encountering the following issue. I have some boolean keys (true/false). For them it looks nice to use .bool_set:N so that I can get automatic validation of the value passed into the key and I also get the key value nicely stored in a boolean variable for later inspection.



At the same time, I would like to execute some code right after the variable is set. However, it looks like .code:n and bool_set:N cannot be used together on the same key, because the one that comes later substitutes the action of the first. In practice, there seems to be no possibility to run a hook triggered by the variable setting action.



Obviously, there are several possible workarounds:




  • run some code after every key_set:nn.

    However, this means that such code needs to check for every possible variable being set to see if it has changed and take action accordingly. If you have say 30 variables, this means checking all of them, when maybe only one of them is being changed. Having a hook invoked just for the variable that has been set seems more appropriate as long as the variables do not interact one with the other.


  • use .code:n instead of the variable setting actions.

    However, this means redoing the parsing and validation of the value.



Because all the workarounds seem to have inefficiencies of their own, I wonder if I am missing something... Any help is appreciated!










share|improve this question







New contributor




Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    up vote
    7
    down vote

    favorite












    I am trying out l3keys for the first time and I am encountering the following issue. I have some boolean keys (true/false). For them it looks nice to use .bool_set:N so that I can get automatic validation of the value passed into the key and I also get the key value nicely stored in a boolean variable for later inspection.



    At the same time, I would like to execute some code right after the variable is set. However, it looks like .code:n and bool_set:N cannot be used together on the same key, because the one that comes later substitutes the action of the first. In practice, there seems to be no possibility to run a hook triggered by the variable setting action.



    Obviously, there are several possible workarounds:




    • run some code after every key_set:nn.

      However, this means that such code needs to check for every possible variable being set to see if it has changed and take action accordingly. If you have say 30 variables, this means checking all of them, when maybe only one of them is being changed. Having a hook invoked just for the variable that has been set seems more appropriate as long as the variables do not interact one with the other.


    • use .code:n instead of the variable setting actions.

      However, this means redoing the parsing and validation of the value.



    Because all the workarounds seem to have inefficiencies of their own, I wonder if I am missing something... Any help is appreciated!










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      7
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      7
      down vote

      favorite











      I am trying out l3keys for the first time and I am encountering the following issue. I have some boolean keys (true/false). For them it looks nice to use .bool_set:N so that I can get automatic validation of the value passed into the key and I also get the key value nicely stored in a boolean variable for later inspection.



      At the same time, I would like to execute some code right after the variable is set. However, it looks like .code:n and bool_set:N cannot be used together on the same key, because the one that comes later substitutes the action of the first. In practice, there seems to be no possibility to run a hook triggered by the variable setting action.



      Obviously, there are several possible workarounds:




      • run some code after every key_set:nn.

        However, this means that such code needs to check for every possible variable being set to see if it has changed and take action accordingly. If you have say 30 variables, this means checking all of them, when maybe only one of them is being changed. Having a hook invoked just for the variable that has been set seems more appropriate as long as the variables do not interact one with the other.


      • use .code:n instead of the variable setting actions.

        However, this means redoing the parsing and validation of the value.



      Because all the workarounds seem to have inefficiencies of their own, I wonder if I am missing something... Any help is appreciated!










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      I am trying out l3keys for the first time and I am encountering the following issue. I have some boolean keys (true/false). For them it looks nice to use .bool_set:N so that I can get automatic validation of the value passed into the key and I also get the key value nicely stored in a boolean variable for later inspection.



      At the same time, I would like to execute some code right after the variable is set. However, it looks like .code:n and bool_set:N cannot be used together on the same key, because the one that comes later substitutes the action of the first. In practice, there seems to be no possibility to run a hook triggered by the variable setting action.



      Obviously, there are several possible workarounds:




      • run some code after every key_set:nn.

        However, this means that such code needs to check for every possible variable being set to see if it has changed and take action accordingly. If you have say 30 variables, this means checking all of them, when maybe only one of them is being changed. Having a hook invoked just for the variable that has been set seems more appropriate as long as the variables do not interact one with the other.


      • use .code:n instead of the variable setting actions.

        However, this means redoing the parsing and validation of the value.



      Because all the workarounds seem to have inefficiencies of their own, I wonder if I am missing something... Any help is appreciated!







      l3keys






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked Dec 15 at 16:27









      Callegar

      461




      461




      New contributor




      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Callegar is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote













          This is not a real solution, more like a viable workaround:



          You could create a .meta:n key, that is the documented front-facing key, and two additional keys, one for the .bool_set:N, and one for the .code:n:



          documentclass{article}

          usepackage{xparse}
          ExplSyntaxOn
          keys_define:nn { Callegar }
          {
          my-bool .meta:n = { my-bool-bool = { #1 }, my-bool-code = { #1 } },
          my-bool-bool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
          my-bool-code .code:n =
          { Execute~Some~Code~for~bool_if:NTF l_Callegar_bool { true } { false } }
          }
          NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
          {
          keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
          }
          ExplSyntaxOff

          begin{document}
          setmykeys{my-bool=true}
          end{document}





          share|improve this answer




























            up vote
            2
            down vote













            The following redefines an internal function of the l3keys module and might therefore break stuff in the future. Use with caution.



            After digging a bit through the l3keys code, I thought one could add a hook to the keys. The following does so by adding a hook mechanism to __keys_cmd_set:nn. After that one can define a hook with:



            keys_define:nn { <module> } { <key> .hook:n = { <hook code> } }


            I didn't test it thoroughly, but as far as a quick view l3keys could tell, the hook mechanism should work with any key type. Note that it doesn't create any key on its own, so you have to use it on an already defined key.



            documentclass{article}

            usepackage{xparse}
            ExplSyntaxOn
            % redefine a part of the internals of l3keys
            cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
            {
            cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
            { #2 use:c { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } }
            }
            % add the .hook:n type
            cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
            {
            tl_gset:cn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } { #1 }
            }

            keys_define:nn { Callegar }
            {
            my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
            my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless },
            my-fool / true .hook:n =
            { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
            my-fool / false .hook:n =
            { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
            }
            NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
            {
            keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
            }
            ExplSyntaxOff

            begin{document}
            setmykeys{my-fool=true}

            setmykeys{my-fool=false}
            end{document}


            enter image description here



            A slightly different implementation that also allows .hook:n to access the value:



            cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
            {
            cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
            {
            #2
            cs_if_exist_use:cT { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } { { ##1 } }
            }
            }
            % add the .hook:n type
            cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
            {
            cs_set:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } ##1 { #1 }
            }

            keys_define:nn { Callegar }
            {
            my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
            my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless~'#1' },
            my-fool / true .hook:n =
            { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
            my-fool / false .hook:n =
            { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
            }





            share|improve this answer























            • Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
              – Callegar
              yesterday










            • @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
              – Skillmon
              yesterday











            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "85"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });






            Callegar is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f465998%2fcode-hook-after-variable-setting-actions-in-l3keys%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            4
            down vote













            This is not a real solution, more like a viable workaround:



            You could create a .meta:n key, that is the documented front-facing key, and two additional keys, one for the .bool_set:N, and one for the .code:n:



            documentclass{article}

            usepackage{xparse}
            ExplSyntaxOn
            keys_define:nn { Callegar }
            {
            my-bool .meta:n = { my-bool-bool = { #1 }, my-bool-code = { #1 } },
            my-bool-bool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
            my-bool-code .code:n =
            { Execute~Some~Code~for~bool_if:NTF l_Callegar_bool { true } { false } }
            }
            NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
            {
            keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
            }
            ExplSyntaxOff

            begin{document}
            setmykeys{my-bool=true}
            end{document}





            share|improve this answer

























              up vote
              4
              down vote













              This is not a real solution, more like a viable workaround:



              You could create a .meta:n key, that is the documented front-facing key, and two additional keys, one for the .bool_set:N, and one for the .code:n:



              documentclass{article}

              usepackage{xparse}
              ExplSyntaxOn
              keys_define:nn { Callegar }
              {
              my-bool .meta:n = { my-bool-bool = { #1 }, my-bool-code = { #1 } },
              my-bool-bool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
              my-bool-code .code:n =
              { Execute~Some~Code~for~bool_if:NTF l_Callegar_bool { true } { false } }
              }
              NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
              {
              keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
              }
              ExplSyntaxOff

              begin{document}
              setmykeys{my-bool=true}
              end{document}





              share|improve this answer























                up vote
                4
                down vote










                up vote
                4
                down vote









                This is not a real solution, more like a viable workaround:



                You could create a .meta:n key, that is the documented front-facing key, and two additional keys, one for the .bool_set:N, and one for the .code:n:



                documentclass{article}

                usepackage{xparse}
                ExplSyntaxOn
                keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                {
                my-bool .meta:n = { my-bool-bool = { #1 }, my-bool-code = { #1 } },
                my-bool-bool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                my-bool-code .code:n =
                { Execute~Some~Code~for~bool_if:NTF l_Callegar_bool { true } { false } }
                }
                NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                {
                keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                }
                ExplSyntaxOff

                begin{document}
                setmykeys{my-bool=true}
                end{document}





                share|improve this answer












                This is not a real solution, more like a viable workaround:



                You could create a .meta:n key, that is the documented front-facing key, and two additional keys, one for the .bool_set:N, and one for the .code:n:



                documentclass{article}

                usepackage{xparse}
                ExplSyntaxOn
                keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                {
                my-bool .meta:n = { my-bool-bool = { #1 }, my-bool-code = { #1 } },
                my-bool-bool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                my-bool-code .code:n =
                { Execute~Some~Code~for~bool_if:NTF l_Callegar_bool { true } { false } }
                }
                NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                {
                keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                }
                ExplSyntaxOff

                begin{document}
                setmykeys{my-bool=true}
                end{document}






                share|improve this answer












                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer










                answered Dec 15 at 18:36









                Skillmon

                21k11941




                21k11941






















                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote













                    The following redefines an internal function of the l3keys module and might therefore break stuff in the future. Use with caution.



                    After digging a bit through the l3keys code, I thought one could add a hook to the keys. The following does so by adding a hook mechanism to __keys_cmd_set:nn. After that one can define a hook with:



                    keys_define:nn { <module> } { <key> .hook:n = { <hook code> } }


                    I didn't test it thoroughly, but as far as a quick view l3keys could tell, the hook mechanism should work with any key type. Note that it doesn't create any key on its own, so you have to use it on an already defined key.



                    documentclass{article}

                    usepackage{xparse}
                    ExplSyntaxOn
                    % redefine a part of the internals of l3keys
                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    { #2 use:c { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    tl_gset:cn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }
                    NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                    {
                    keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                    }
                    ExplSyntaxOff

                    begin{document}
                    setmykeys{my-fool=true}

                    setmykeys{my-fool=false}
                    end{document}


                    enter image description here



                    A slightly different implementation that also allows .hook:n to access the value:



                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    {
                    #2
                    cs_if_exist_use:cT { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } { { ##1 } }
                    }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    cs_set:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } ##1 { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless~'#1' },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }





                    share|improve this answer























                    • Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                      – Callegar
                      yesterday










                    • @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                      – Skillmon
                      yesterday















                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote













                    The following redefines an internal function of the l3keys module and might therefore break stuff in the future. Use with caution.



                    After digging a bit through the l3keys code, I thought one could add a hook to the keys. The following does so by adding a hook mechanism to __keys_cmd_set:nn. After that one can define a hook with:



                    keys_define:nn { <module> } { <key> .hook:n = { <hook code> } }


                    I didn't test it thoroughly, but as far as a quick view l3keys could tell, the hook mechanism should work with any key type. Note that it doesn't create any key on its own, so you have to use it on an already defined key.



                    documentclass{article}

                    usepackage{xparse}
                    ExplSyntaxOn
                    % redefine a part of the internals of l3keys
                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    { #2 use:c { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    tl_gset:cn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }
                    NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                    {
                    keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                    }
                    ExplSyntaxOff

                    begin{document}
                    setmykeys{my-fool=true}

                    setmykeys{my-fool=false}
                    end{document}


                    enter image description here



                    A slightly different implementation that also allows .hook:n to access the value:



                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    {
                    #2
                    cs_if_exist_use:cT { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } { { ##1 } }
                    }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    cs_set:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } ##1 { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless~'#1' },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }





                    share|improve this answer























                    • Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                      – Callegar
                      yesterday










                    • @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                      – Skillmon
                      yesterday













                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote










                    up vote
                    2
                    down vote









                    The following redefines an internal function of the l3keys module and might therefore break stuff in the future. Use with caution.



                    After digging a bit through the l3keys code, I thought one could add a hook to the keys. The following does so by adding a hook mechanism to __keys_cmd_set:nn. After that one can define a hook with:



                    keys_define:nn { <module> } { <key> .hook:n = { <hook code> } }


                    I didn't test it thoroughly, but as far as a quick view l3keys could tell, the hook mechanism should work with any key type. Note that it doesn't create any key on its own, so you have to use it on an already defined key.



                    documentclass{article}

                    usepackage{xparse}
                    ExplSyntaxOn
                    % redefine a part of the internals of l3keys
                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    { #2 use:c { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    tl_gset:cn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }
                    NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                    {
                    keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                    }
                    ExplSyntaxOff

                    begin{document}
                    setmykeys{my-fool=true}

                    setmykeys{my-fool=false}
                    end{document}


                    enter image description here



                    A slightly different implementation that also allows .hook:n to access the value:



                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    {
                    #2
                    cs_if_exist_use:cT { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } { { ##1 } }
                    }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    cs_set:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } ##1 { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless~'#1' },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }





                    share|improve this answer














                    The following redefines an internal function of the l3keys module and might therefore break stuff in the future. Use with caution.



                    After digging a bit through the l3keys code, I thought one could add a hook to the keys. The following does so by adding a hook mechanism to __keys_cmd_set:nn. After that one can define a hook with:



                    keys_define:nn { <module> } { <key> .hook:n = { <hook code> } }


                    I didn't test it thoroughly, but as far as a quick view l3keys could tell, the hook mechanism should work with any key type. Note that it doesn't create any key on its own, so you have to use it on an already defined key.



                    documentclass{article}

                    usepackage{xparse}
                    ExplSyntaxOn
                    % redefine a part of the internals of l3keys
                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    { #2 use:c { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    tl_gset:cn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }
                    NewDocumentCommand setmykeys { m }
                    {
                    keys_set:nn { Callegar } { #1 }
                    }
                    ExplSyntaxOff

                    begin{document}
                    setmykeys{my-fool=true}

                    setmykeys{my-fool=false}
                    end{document}


                    enter image description here



                    A slightly different implementation that also allows .hook:n to access the value:



                    cs_set_protected:Npn __keys_cmd_set:nn #1#2
                    {
                    cs_set_protected:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 } ##1
                    {
                    #2
                    cs_if_exist_use:cT { c__keys_code_root_tl #1 _hook } { { ##1 } }
                    }
                    }
                    % add the .hook:n type
                    cs_new_protected:cpn { c__keys_props_root_tl .hook:n } #1
                    {
                    cs_set:cpn { c__keys_code_root_tl l_keys_path_tl _hook } ##1 { #1 }
                    }

                    keys_define:nn { Callegar }
                    {
                    my-fool .bool_set:N = l_Callegar_bool,
                    my-fool .hook:n = { Execute~Some~Code~Regardless~'#1' },
                    my-fool / true .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~true },
                    my-fool / false .hook:n =
                    { Execute~Some~Hook~Code~for~false },
                    }






                    share|improve this answer














                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer








                    edited Dec 15 at 21:36

























                    answered Dec 15 at 20:12









                    Skillmon

                    21k11941




                    21k11941












                    • Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                      – Callegar
                      yesterday










                    • @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                      – Skillmon
                      yesterday


















                    • Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                      – Callegar
                      yesterday










                    • @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                      – Skillmon
                      yesterday
















                    Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                    – Callegar
                    yesterday




                    Thanks Skillmon, that's interesting although by being a new on l3keys its hard for me to read its code to understand how you are touching its internals. If I get it correctly, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal used to associate code to the keys, 1st argument is the key path and 2nd one is the code itself, is this the OK? So you are imposing that after the regular code the hook code is used, is this correct? What puzzles me a bit is the role of all those constants. Furthermore, the variant is a little obscure to me in how it passes ##1 to the hook. Could you help me understand?
                    – Callegar
                    yesterday












                    @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                    – Skillmon
                    yesterday




                    @Callegar yes, __keys_cmd_set:nn is the internal to actually define a key and most/all key types are using it internally. All those constants are internals of l3keys, too, which are supposed to assure no naming conflicts.The variant checks whether the hook has been defined (cs_if_exist_use:cT), and if it does it inputs the control sequence and the next argument, stripping one pair of braces. So if foo_hook exists, cs_if_exist_use:cT { foo_hook } { { ##1 } } expands to foo_hook { ##1 }, and foo_hook can absorb that argument.
                    – Skillmon
                    yesterday










                    Callegar is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                    draft saved

                    draft discarded


















                    Callegar is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                    Callegar is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    Callegar is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                    Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f465998%2fcode-hook-after-variable-setting-actions-in-l3keys%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    If I really need a card on my start hand, how many mulligans make sense? [duplicate]

                    Alcedinidae

                    Can an atomic nucleus contain both particles and antiparticles? [duplicate]