[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Generalising @def*

From: Gavin Smith
Subject: Re: Generalising @def*
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2023 20:16:17 +0000

On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 08:11:22PM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2023 at 11:59:07AM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote:
> > 
> > I've commited changes to texinfo.tex to introduce @defblock, @deflinex
> > and @deftypelinex.  @deflinex is like @deffnx and @deftypelinex is like
> > @deftypefnx.  The names of these could change, for example to remove the 'x'
> > at the end of the commands, if we decide this would be better.
> > 
> > I believe this covers usage for @defvr, @deftypevr, @deftp.
> > 
> > I have gone off the idea of using @macro for this.  I am thinking a
> > more limited command would be better, as mentioned in an earlier message
> > 
> >   @newdef defbuiltin = typed, tt, Built-in Function, fn
> > 
> > or similar.  This would cover the basics and be easy to use and understand.
> > The example here would translate a @defbuiltin line to a @deftypelinex line
> > within a @defblock.
> I do not like that, as this adds commands that are not in the language
> and it is always a pain.  I liked the generic command + separate index
> entries, that could be grouped with @macro better.

OK, I know that dynamically updating command lists or handling
command macro expansion can add a lot of complexity to texi2any.
The next step now is probably to add @defblock to texi2any.

I still don't think that

@defMac{macro1, (arg1@comma{} arg2)}

is a very good syntax, though.  Maybe we could come back to this.

reply via email to

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