[DVIPDFMx] Re: latest change to pdfnames.c

[Jin-Hwan Cho]

On Jun 18, 2008, at 5:18 PM, Matthias.Franz at ujf-grenoble.fr wrote:

> Quoting Jin-Hwan Cho <chofchof at ktug.or.kr>:
>>> What should we do if an object reference is redefined? Currently
>>> we discard the new value (BTW, there is a memory leak, i.e., no
>>> pdf_release_obj). If you think of the situation where DVI files are
>>> concatenated, it might be better to replace the old value.
>>
>> It would be better to support both ways. How? I have no idea yet.
>> In many cases, I also wanted to replace the previous value, but we
>> should think about the compatibility to the previous versions.
>
> Do you have an example where the new value should be discarded?
> I can only think of broken DVI files made by buggy TeX macros
> and not of a situation where the new definition was deliberately
> inserted. And I don't think we should take buggy software as our
> guiding line.

You are right.

>> Why don't you make a new special or a new option which supports
>> replacing?
>
> If you want to concatenate existing DVI files, a new special doesn't
> help. A new option might be a solution (if it makes sense to keep
> the old value at all). I would choose "replace old value" as default.

I have the same opinion as yours if it provides a compatibility.

Best regards, ChoF.