> > The same is true for the fact that e.g. after a plain `[' in
> > @deffn you have to use @var{} for variables or you get the wrong
> > font...
>
> I didn't even know that, until you told it now. I wonder if Karl
> knew...
Yes :-) I've complained about that earlier.
> In general, @def... directives are highly irregular in their use of
> the braces and the magic conversions they perform on their
> arguments. Since these conversions are all specially written for
> this family of commands, some of the aspects of their behavior are
> next to impossible to grasp without experimenting, especially if you
> use special characters such as `[' and `{'.
The brace problem you mean is this?
@deffn {foo bar} name arguments...
> IMHO, if you can suggest new commands that follow the Texinfo syntax
> and solve whatever problems you tried to solve with macros, it'd be
> easier to add these new commands to Texinfo than to fix the messy
> problems with macros. (All of the non-messy problems with macros
> are already solved ;-)
It would be sufficient for me to have a working @deffn.
What about creating a variant of @deffn, say, @definition, which
. is a regular texinfo function
. follows the standard syntactical rules
. works with macros
. doesn't format its arguments?
People than have to say e.g.
@definition @w{cate gory} name @var{arg1} [@var{arg2}] ...
BTW, which are the messy parts of macros (besides the @deffn
irregularities)?
Werner
_______________________________________________
Bug-texinfo mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-texinfo
