[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: @defun and @defvr in the "same" block?

From: Jacob Bachmeyer
Subject: Re: @defun and @defvr in the "same" block?
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2022 20:35:01 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv: Gecko/20090807 SeaMonkey/1.1.17 Mnenhy/

Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 11:37:10AM -0800, Raymond Toy wrote:
However, I've run into a small issue.  The original Scribe did things like:

@defun[fun {check-region-query-size}, args {@i[region]}]
@defhvar1[var {Region Query Size}, val {30}]

This basically looks like as if I'd done defunx, except Region Query Size
is marked as a Hemlock Variable.

My translation is

@deffn {Function} {check-region-query-size} {@i{region}}
@deffnx {Hemlock Variable} {Region Query Size} @val{30}
@end deffn

The output matches the Scribe output.  But Region Query Size is in the
Function Index, and not the Variable Index.

Is the only way to fix this is to use separate these two out and use @defvr
for Region Query Size and potentially rewrite the description to match?

Currently yes.  But indeed, it would be natural in that case to follow
@deffn by @defvarx.  I think that it would not be hard to implement that
in texi2any, but I am not sure that we want to have that possibility in
the Texinfo language.

What would be wrong with it? Since the @def*x commands do not start a block, instead adding additional heading lines to the current definition block, why should they not be intermixable? This would be particularly appropriate for Lisp-family languages, where dynamic bindings can be used as implicit function arguments.

-- Jacob

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]