Re: rethinking @def*

[Gavin Smith]

On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 10:55:58AM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> I'd like to do this, but just on the @def line, nowhere else.

I've nearly got this implemented and will soon commit.

Although that said, there are contexts that are "def-like" but do
not use a @def command.  Here's an example from the elisp manual:

@table @code
@item repeat @var{count} @var{field-specs}@dots{}
Process the @var{field-specs} recursively, in order, then repeat
starting from the first one, processing all the specifications @var{count}
times overall.  The @var{count} is given using the same formats as a
field length---if an @code{eval} form is used, it is evaluated just once.
For correct operation, each specification in @var{field-specs} must
include a name.
@end table

count and field-specs here should really be in the slanted font, not
slanted typewriter, if it was to be consistent with @def formatting.

There are examples in texinfo.texi, too:

@table @code
@findex deftypefn
@item @@deftypefn @var{category} @var{data-type} @var{name} @var{arguments}@dots
+{}
The @code{@@deftypefn} command is the general definition command for
functions and similar entities that may take arguments and that are
typed.  The @code{@@deftypefn} command is written at the beginning of
a line and is followed on the same line by the category of entity
being described, the type of the returned value, the name of this
particular entity, and its arguments, if any.
@end table