On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:05 PM, karho...@gmail.com wrote:
all these commands that you have recently changed need proper
documentation, once the dust has settled.
Thanks for this reminder. I've just put it on the list.
There were also some obscure points I came across while reading
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 12:50 PM, gatesphere gatesph...@gmail.com wrote:
@auto-md is useful for the same reasons. And afaik, is completely
undocumented.
Thanks for this heads up. I'll make sure all flavors of @auto-* are
documented for 5.1. For sure, @auto will remain for the
I've been following the recent discussion about replacing @auto with
@nosent (and by extension, @auto-rst). Now, maybe I'm missing something
obvious, but when I change my @auto-rst files to @nosent files, the
resulting files do not contain the RST section headers that were
automatically added
No, it's not. It's always been difficult for me to see what it's supposed
to do. I figured it out on my own with some trial and error. Then there
were issues with v5 reading earlier files (had something to do with where
extra line feeds were or something). Thanks for your response, looks like
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Largo84 larg...@gmail.com wrote:
...when I change my @auto-rst files to @nosent files, the resulting files
do not contain the RST section headers that were automatically added by
@auto-rst.
Oops. Good thing 5.1 will continue support for @auto-rst!
My
On 2/14/2015 1:13 PM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 9:55 AM, Largo84 larg...@gmail.com
mailto:larg...@gmail.com wrote:
...when I change my @auto-rst files to @nosent files, the
resulting files do not contain the RST section headers that were
automatically added
On Saturday, 14 February 2015 18:13:29 UTC, Edward K. Ream wrote:
It looks like you've proven that @auto-rst is still useful. Thanks for
these comments. Furthermore, I'm not sure @auto-rst is properly
documented. I've put it on the list to check...
This partially answers your question
