Re: @anchor on @item line (was: emacs-29 889a550ca08: ; Fix Texinfo warnings)

On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 07:29:50PM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 05, 2023 at 11:30:42AM +0000, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
> > May someone please explain the correct usage of @anchor in the above
> > example and why the warning is being thrown?
> 
> I don't think there's really much wrong with it.  We added more warnings
> for nested commands, trying to define which commands should occur in
> certain contexts.  We have given the @item command a class of
> "contain_basic_inline", which excludes anchor commands, as well as
> the cross-reference commands.
> 
> I don't remember, or never knew to start with, what the justification
> was for giving @item this class.

I agree that accepting @anchor and @*ref on @item in @*table line would
be ok.

> However, for whatever reason, this use of @anchor on an @item line
> didn't trigger the warning in earlier releases.

My guess is that the code has been fixed to really use the 'flags' of
item_LINE and not the flags of @item that appears in @itemize,
@enumerate and @multitable which alreay has no restrictions in its content.

> It would be easy, I expect, to remove this warning:
> 
> diff --git a/tp/Texinfo/command_data.txt b/tp/Texinfo/command_data.txt
> index 7d07b8bd54..df63c6ccd7 100644
> --- a/tp/Texinfo/command_data.txt
> +++ b/tp/Texinfo/command_data.txt
> @@ -254,8 +254,8 @@ printindex              line,formattable_line,close_paragraph,global,contain_pla
>  listoffloats            line,formattable_line,close_paragraph,global,contain_basic_inline   LINE_line
>  exdent                  line,formatted_line,close_paragraph            LINE_line
>  # or nobrace skipspace, depending on the context
> -item_LINE               line,formatted_line,close_paragraph,contain_basic_inline    LINE_line
> -itemx                   line,formatted_line,close_paragraph,contain_basic_inline    LINE_line
> +item_LINE               line,formatted_line,close_paragraph    LINE_line
> +itemx                   line,formatted_line,close_paragraph    LINE_line
>  nodedescription         line,close_paragraph                               LINE_line
>  # in index entries
>  subentry                line,in_index,contain_basic_inline          LINE_line
> 0$ 
> 
> However, I would like to wait to see if anybody else has any comments first.

Looks good to me.

-- 
Pat