[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: info --index not finding all indexed entries
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: info --index not finding all indexed entries |
Date: |
Wed, 18 Aug 2010 22:23:03 +0300 |
> Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 20:17:15 +0200
> From: Ralf Wildenhues <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> For functions or macros like above, where there is typically one
> definition in the manual but several potentially interesting places
> a user might want to look up, do you recommend putting only the
> actual definition in the function index @findex, and all other, more
> qualified ones, in the concept index @cindex, or would you say it's
> better to add all of them to the function index?
It doesn't really matter. I suppose having them in @findex would be
slightly better. Just remember that @findex entries are implicitly
put in @code, so you need something like
@findex address@hidden, and bla-bla}
to get the rest of the text in the normal roman typeface.
> Then, I noticed that
> @ftable
> @item function(args)
> ...
> @end ftable
>
> causes 'function(args)' to be indexed, not just 'function'. Bug or
> feature?
Feature. @ftable is documented to enter text of each @item into
@findex, so it does exactly what it's supposed to do.
I would argue that @ftable is inappropriate with such tables, you
should use an explicit @findex before each @item. Or maybe the @item
should just say "function", it all depends on the context.
In general, @ftable is not for every table. It's being abused here,
IMHO, probably because someone didn't want to bother to write a
separate @findex for the @item's which need that.
> If the latter, is there a way to avoid it without rewriting the
> whole (large) table to not use @ftable?
If you really need the args part there, I don't see any better way.
Do these @item's really need to be in the index? Maybe they don't, in
which case you could simply replace @ftable with @table.
> More generally, is it possible to have @item's in an @ftable which
> aren't indexed (so I could override the index entry manually), and
> if not, any chance such functionality could be added?
That would be a nice extension. I don't think makeinfo can do that
now.