Robert Dodier writes:
>
>>I'd like to attract attention to yet another documentation problem.
>>At present many functions and features which are available
>>as share packages and require some load("foo"); for operation
>>are mixed with other built-in Maxima function.
>>This is OK as soon as this required load("foo"); is clearly
>>indicated.
>>It seems that it is not the case. Maybe it is good idea to create
>>special package index. Finally, is it possible to create something
>>like @defpackage for packages description?
>>
>
>A package index makes a lot of sense to me. I wonder what
>is the best way to go about that.
>
>
We can use
@deffn Package <package-name>
for packages entry. It works out of box.
There are only two problems
1. Adding third entry type "Package" to .info
may require some modification to describe.
As far as I remember describe uses keywords "Function"
and "Variable" to find end of the current entry text.
Not a big deal but remember that GCL uses it's own
built-in describe. BTW, Macsyma distinguish even
more entry types: Function, Spacial Symbol, Option Variable,
System Variable, Special Form (maybe more).
2. Now @defun @defvar and @deffn automatically adds
into one fn index. This is more or less OK with
functions and variables but we probably want to see
packages in separate index. On the other hand Macsyma
collects all multiple types of entries in one index
but entry's type is clearly indicated:
sin (Function) ................ 97
Nice solution but I don't know how to implement
something like this in texinfo.
--
Vadim V. Zhytnikov
<vvzhy@mail.ru>
<vvzhy@netorn.ru>