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

[lib] Review macros for library index #2223

Closed
jensmaurer opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

[lib] Review macros for library index #2223

jensmaurer opened this issue Jun 28, 2018 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
big An issue causing a large set of changes, scattered across most of the text.

Comments

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member

jensmaurer commented Jun 28, 2018

We currently have \indexlibrary (just add an index entry; full LaTeX syntax support) and \indexlibrarymember{a}{b} which adds entries for a!b and b!a. The latter automatically wraps the arguments in \idxcode. The former doesn't, such that nearly all uses of (plain) \indexlibrary (except those creating entries for constructors and destructors) have a nested \idxcode. That's both error-prone and too verbose.
Suggestion: Add macro \indexlibraryitem{a} which automatically adds the \idxcode. Add macro \indexlibraryspmember{a}{b} ("special member function") which does not wrap "a" into \idxcode, but otherwise behaves like \indexlibrarymember. End result: grep -w indexlibrary should only show hits in macros.tex going forward.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer added big An issue causing a large set of changes, scattered across most of the text. decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. labels Jun 28, 2018
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

jensmaurer commented Nov 6, 2018

Editorial meeting: \indexlibraryspmember , call \indexlibraryconstructor and destructor (or ctor and dtor), because there are the uses for that. @tkoeppe should offer an opinion.

@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Editorial meeting: @tkoeppe volunteers to write the macros. Alisdair volunteers to apply the macros once they exist.

@jensmaurer jensmaurer removed the decision-required A decision of the editorial group (or the Project Editor) is required. label Feb 22, 2019
@jensmaurer
Copy link
Member Author

Most of this was addressed by #3096. Anyone interested in more fixes should open a new, more specific, issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
big An issue causing a large set of changes, scattered across most of the text.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants