Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2003 17:40:07 +0200 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Message-Id: <2561-Wed05Feb2003174006+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: (message from Esa A E Peuha on Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:45:03 +0200 (EET)) Subject: Re: Add @tindex for types in docs [PATCH] References: <3E3FDCB5 DOT D2875A7E AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2003 13:45:03 +0200 (EET) > From: Esa A E Peuha > > I think that it's best not to have any duplicate definitions. Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. Think about a user who wants to use `fstat', but is told that `struct stat' is documented on the `stat' page. Such a user will need to jump between these two pages back and forth all the time. Not many DJGPP users know enough secrets of the Info reader that will allow them to do that and remain sane (e.g., how many of those who read this list know that the stand-alone Info reader can show two pages at the same time in a split-window display? try "Ctrl-x 2" some day). But I'm not going to veto any changes that delete multiple descriptions of data types. Just keep this gotcha in mind before you decide. > Is it OK to use @mkdoc for this kind of thing? Sorry, I don't understand: what does @mkdoc refer to here? You need to realize that in the Texinfo context, the `@' character is loaded with a meaning...