Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[grammar index] Fix warnings; prefer listing bold page locators. #2013

Open
wants to merge 7 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

godbyk
Copy link
Contributor

@godbyk godbyk commented Apr 2, 2018

WORK IN PROGRESS — DO NOT MERGE YET

Fixes issue #1917.

For this PR I used xindy only for the grammar terms index. But we could use it for the other indices as well.

I think latexmk may still use makeindex for all the indices. I don't know if it can be configured to use xindy for just the grammar index or not. (I don't use latexmk much. I'll have to check the docs.)

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

Well, we should definitely get latexmk going. Looks like the "latexmkrc" file needs a setting for "makeindex", pointing to xindy instead. And yes, that will be used for all indexes, not just the grammar index.

@godbyk
Copy link
Contributor Author

godbyk commented Apr 3, 2018

I've updated the latexmkrc config file so that it runs xindy. I also modified it so that it automatically builds with pdfLaTeX and only builds the std.tex file. So you can just run latexmk with no arguments now and it should do the right thing.

I'm currently fixing up the index cross-references. xindy treats cross-references as first-class objects and will report an error if you refer to a nonexistent index entry. As a consequence of this, the argument to the see and seealso entries must match the unformatted main index entry to which it refers. In other words, I'm changing \index{blah|see{something, else}} to \index{blah|see{something!else}}. (Alternatively, I can instruct xindy to not check the cross-references. Personally, I think it's probably worth the initial pain as it makes the index syntax more consistent [i.e., always use entry!subentry] and helps us find dangling references.)

There are a few other odds and ends I'm going to check up on, too. I'll post progress updates as I go and will tidy up the git commit history before the final merge.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added the needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts. label Apr 3, 2018
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

I've added a "needs rebase" tag, repurposing it as a general "needs more work" thing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
needs rebase The pull request needs a git rebase to resolve merge conflicts.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants