[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Stephan Pabst's indexing problems
From: |
Valeriy E. Ushakov |
Subject: |
Re: Stephan Pabst's indexing problems |
Date: |
Mon, 16 Nov 1998 03:40:19 +0300 |
On Tue, Nov 10, 1998 at 02:54:33PM +1000, Jeff Kingston wrote:
The strange output Stephan got is:
> Kurs
> in GLAEUBIGERTERMINE, 1, in
> GLAEUBIGERTERMINE, 1
> im Kursdatensegment, 1
> in TILGUNGSTERMINE, 1
> (1) I'm not sure why the two in GLAEUBIGERTERMINE entries are not
> merged
The two GLAEUBIGERTERMINE entries (one from the table and one from the
text) are not merged for the same reason the TILGUNGSTERMINE entry is
indented. See below.
> (2) The last entry, in TILGUNGSTERMINE, 1 is indented because, as
> the debug output reported by pabst shows,
>
> { @OneCol {} in"TILGUNGSTERMINE" }
>
> his @OneCol symbol is not being applied to in"TILGUNGSTERMINE"
> but rather to an empty object preceding it. This also goes
> away outside the figure or table, but at present I'm stumped
> on how @SubIndex @OneCol { in TILGUNGSTERMINE } could have
> generated this debug output.
This confused me at first too... Then I made a couple of observation:
. parser is extremely unlikely to be buggy
. `in' in the debugging output is NOT QUOTED!
Then I quickly made a break point at AppendString and when it was
about to print `in' in
{} in"TILGUNGSTERMINE"
I moved up the stack to check where in the echo() we came from...
Then I bumped my head into the wall and exclaimed "Elementary,
Watson":
export "in" ...
def @Fig
...
body @Body
{
...
def in precedence 39 left x {
@BackEnd @Case {
PostScript @Yield { x "in" }
...
}
}
...
}
So in debugging output there's no quotes, for `in' is a symbol and no
braces, since `in's priority is higher than that of @OneCol.
Then, to prove it, I just quoted the two in's and got:
Kurs
in GLAEUBIGERTERMINE, 1
im Kursdatensegment, 1
in TILGUNGSTERMINE, 1
Stephan, I first thought you meant @Figure instead of @Fig and I read
what I perceived, not what you wrote, otherwise the answer would be
immediately obvious.
@Fig is a deprecated package for drawing graphics, now superceded with
@Diag. I doubt you really want to put a table with index entries
inside a picture. And dl provides it's own version of @Box, so if
_that_ was the reason, you can drop the @Fig and use dl's version of
@Box.
Hope that helps.
SY, Uwe
--
address@hidden | Zu Grunde kommen
http://www.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/ | Ist zu Grunde gehen