Re: @defun and @defvr in the "same" block?

On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 1:56 PM Gavin Smith <[email protected]>
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 22, 2022 at 07:21:05AM -0800, Raymond Toy wrote:
> > Oh, and for the record, look at
> > https://cmucl.common-lisp.dev/doc/encycmuclopedia/devenv/cim.ps for the
> > original Scribe version.  Look at the bottom of page 7.
> >
> > For the conversion, see the bottom of page 6 of
> > https://cmucl.common-lisp.dev/docs/hem/cim/cim.pdf
> >
> > just so the various bits are in the correct index.
>
> Interesting to see the Scribe document - I don't think I've seen one
> before.
>

I've only ever seen 2 such docs.  I googled all over to find any kind of
description of Scribe but failed.  Fortunately, there was the source doc
along with the PS file, so I just kind of reverse-engineered what Scribe
did to find a Texinfo equivalent.  The languages are surprisingly similar.

>
> I think that @deffn and @defvrx etc. could be mixed, although
> the @def* commands have long been an area where changes could be
> made to be more general.  See the TODO file in the git repository.
> If we had some way of explicitly specifying the index that a @def*
> command would use, then this would solve this problem.
>


-- 
Ray