Context: I've inherited a mess of latex notes from another faculty member; these are processed by using a home-brew system that does lots of clever stuff ... but that means that I must work on them using the linux systems at the office, and also means that finding bugs ends up being a binary-search process, because the clever processing eats up all the error messages and mangles them.
Here's the thing: a typical file looks like this:
@course{coursehead}
@lec{17}{\textit{(Provisional)} Analysis, Combinatorics}
@cs{coursebegin}
@localnotes{obj}
@localnotes{racket/text/stars-and-stripes}
@localnotes{racket/text/analysis}
which turns out to mean (in real LaTeX) just this:
\include{../../latex/coursehead}
\title{Lecture 17 \textit{(Provisional)} Analysis, Combinatorics}
\include{../../latex/coursebegin}
\include{obj}
\include{racket/text/stars-and-stripes}
\include{racket/text/analysis}
So if I could just "define" "@localnotes" to mean "\include", I'd be about 90% of the way to being able to work with the notes without breaking anything from the other system.
Question: Is there a way to make something like "@localnotes" act as a latex macro? Perhaps equally important: is it certain that there is no way to do so? {If it can't be done, I'd like to stop looking for ways to do it!}.
I'm not very tex-savvy. At about the point where I see "makeatletter", I know that I'm about to not understand whatever follows. But if there's a solution that somehow uses this, I'll slog through it until I understand it.
Thanks in advance.
@to mean the same thing as\-- certainly not something I'd ever do myself. It's very possible (and even common to do this sort of thing in package code) but I wouldn't recommend it in an 'author-level' document. I would take the time to turn all those@s into\s. – Sean Allred Oct 21 '15 at 16:32@currently processed by LaTeX, or are you introducing the ability to compile these notes by yourself? (While it's certainly possible in TeX, it might be easier to introduce some flexibility in the external system. I'm going to continue under the assumption that this should be processed by TeX directly.) – Sean Allred Oct 21 '15 at 16:46