bugtexinfo - GNU documentation system - Bugs: bug #43406, @deffn inserts unwanted whitespace

 
 

You are not allowed to post comments on this tracker with your current authentication level.

bug #43406: @deffn inserts unwanted whitespace

Submitted by:  Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Submitted on:  Sun 12 Oct 2014 01:47:59 PM UTC  
 
Category: NoneRelease: svn r5869
Priority: 5 - NormalSeverity: 4 - Important
Item Group: NonePrivacy: Public
Open/Closed: ClosedAssigned to: Patrice Dumas <pertusus>
Status: Fixed

(Jump to the original submission Jump to the original submission)

Mon 20 Oct 2014 05:11:33 AM UTC, comment #8:

It works now as expected, thanks!

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Sun 19 Oct 2014 09:46:59 PM UTC, comment #7:

The original isse (words splitting in @def) should be fixed in svn, as you proposed: text and @-commands intermingled without spaces are treated as one word in the name/category/type part of the @def line.

For now I haven't carried that change to the arguments part of the line, because I was under the impression that @var{} and @code{} are special here, so that it is unclear that words at @var{} and @code{} is not the right thing to do. I am not sure that it is problematic, though, since in the arguments part of @def line, there are no spaces added, spaces put by the user are kept as is.

I close, please reopen if you think this is not fixed.

Patrice Dumas <pertusus>
Project MemberIn charge of this item.
Wed 15 Oct 2014 05:12:18 AM UTC, comment #6:

Regarding #4: This is interesting, and you have a point here. Unfortunately, your argumentation is

(a) not backwards compatible,
(b) not reflecting what `texinfo.tex' is currently doing, and
(c) non-intuitive: For me, a `word' in this context is something delimited by spaces – this is what Joe User expects also, I guess.

Regarding #5: I strongly disagree to make Patrice's interpretation the default! I would much favour to fix the current behaviour of makeinfo.

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Wed 15 Oct 2014 04:57:25 AM UTC, comment #5:

Karl wrote:

Regarding @*heading, sadly, I am pretty sure I have seen more than one document abuse those commands to randomly format text inside blocks. I believe the text in the manual really meant to say "not relating to the node/sectioning structure" rather than be interpreted as literally "anywhere", but we should probably support it if we can. I'll see if I can make it work (again?) in TeX.

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Wed 15 Oct 2014 04:52:59 AM UTC, comment #4:

[To have the complete discussion on the bug tracker, I'm adding comments sent to the bug-texinfo mailing list.]

Patrice:

It is on purpose. An @-command delimitates a special value on the @def* line, in the same way as braces do (except when in the ARGUMENTS... part), so @t{A} is an argument, and then it gets its space. The manual says:

As a general rule, when any of the arguments in the heading line
except the last one are more than one word, you need to enclose them
in braces. This may also be necessary if the text contains commands,
for example, '{declaraci@'on}' if you are writing in Spanish.

Which means, in my opinion, that you should have put braces.

That being said, it is not specified in the manual that a braced command delimitates a value on a @def* line, so this could also be changed.

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Tue 14 Oct 2014 04:05:57 AM UTC, comment #3:

Sigh. `Dark corners'...

Well, the current git version of groff.texinfo now converts fine to PDF with both texinfo 4.x and 5.x. The PDF can be generated with

texi2dvi -e --pdf groff.texinfo

and the info file with

makeinfo --enable-encoding groff.texinfo

What exactly do you mean with `not easy to deal with the source tree'?

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Mon 13 Oct 2014 05:58:24 PM UTC, comment #2:

confirmed, will pursue, thanks for the report.

yes, you have mentioned groff.texinfo as a test case many times, and i have in fact run it as a test many times. but your manual is so complicated and uses so many dark corners of the language, it has never seemed feasible to automate such a test. it's not easy to deal with the source tree, either. sorry, but that's my reality.

best,
karl

Karl Berry <karl>
Project Administrator
Sun 12 Oct 2014 02:15:03 PM UTC, comment #1:

BTW, this is a regression compared to the 4.x series of texinfo.

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member
Sun 12 Oct 2014 01:47:59 PM UTC, original submission:

The following code

@deffn X @t{A}B@t{C}
@end deffn

if processed with `makeinfo' creates the following code in the info file:

-- X: A BC

Note the invalid space after `A'. groff.texinfo uses this construction a lot, and there is a big difference between the correct

\B'anything'

and the incorrect

\B' anything'

I think I mentioned multiple times that the groff texinfo manual is a good test for makeinfo and friends ...

Werner LEMBERG <wl>
Project Member

 

No files currently attached

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -unavailable- added by pertusus (Posted a comment)
  • -unavailable- added by karl (Posted a comment)
  • -unavailable- added by wl (Submitted the item)
  •  

    Do you think this task is very important?
    If so, you can click here to add your encouragement to it.
    This task has 0 encouragements so far.

    Only logged-in users can vote.

     

    Please enter the title of George Orwell's famous dystopian book (it's a date):

     

     

    Follow 3 latest changes.

    Date Changed By Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced By
    Sun 19 Oct 2014 09:46:59 PM UTCpertususOpen/ClosedOpen=>Closed
      Assigned toNone=>pertusus
      StatusNone=>Fixed

    Back to the top


    Powered by Savane 3.1-cleanup1