Re: Relating multiple index entries to one table item

Patrice Dumas <[email protected]> writes:

> It does not solve the case of wanting more than one index entry per
> table item.

Hm, that is true.  With a little uglification it would work in the GCC
case, though (i.e. also emitting @item[x]s for -Wno-... rather than
having both the yes and no case index on the same @item).

> It looks consistent with the language, but having @-command dynamically
> generated is a pain for implementation (other than using @alias or
> @macro).  For instance, the dynamically generated @-commands for index
> obtained from @def[code]index are not practical in many situations in
> implementation, though they are practical for the Texinfo writers.

Right, fair enough.  What about @itable <index code> <item printer>?
Since the current indices (and URLs) refer to non-dash-prefixed versions
of flags, it might be possible to do something like:

  @macro gcctabopt{body}
  @code{-\code\}
  @end macro

  @itable op @gccdabopt
  @item Wpedantic
  @itemx pedantic

  etc etc
  @end itable

Can @alias handle opening block commands so that @itable ... can be
shortened to just @optable in normal code?  This isn't mandatory, but
would have the ``practical for writers'' effect.

Thanks in advance, and have a great night.
-- 
Arsen Arsenović

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iOYEARYKAI4WIQT+4rPRE/wAoxYtYGFSwpQwHqLEkwUCY3vseF8UgAAAAAAuAChp
c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0RkVF
MkIzRDExM0ZDMDBBMzE2MkQ2MDYxNTJDMjk0MzAxRUEyQzQ5MxAcYXJzZW5AYWFy
c2VuLm1lAAoJEFLClDAeosSTY3cA/1JVC97q9vy5PjyDA+DLQPb3zfGp4XznizYI
fyYLmuMcAQD0Dk0eFEmOSobf2ksRLZCAk/pjEddxfYO2ks3qdxmeCQ==
=7imw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----