-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 267
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Correct mark-up for non-documented cmds #1325
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one inline comment (but basically without action I guess).
% \begin{macro}{\InputIfFileExists} | ||
% \begin{macro}{\@input@file@exists@with@hooks} | ||
% \begin{macro}{\unqu@tefilef@und} | ||
% \begin{macro}[no-user-doc]{\InputIfFileExists} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
sure we don't want to document that one given that it is CamelCase?
TLC3 documents both \IfFileExists and this one and says
The command \InputIfFileExists tests not only whether file exists, but also inputs it immediately after executing then-code. The name file is then added to the list of files to be displayed by \listfiles .
But looking a bit further I guess it is just that the documentation for this command is in another file, so I guess making it no-user-doc here is correct.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's described in ltclass.dtx
: we re-define it in ltfilehooks.dtx
, but that means there's no user documentation here - I guess we need a 'described elsewhere' marker but for the present no-user-doc
seemed the best fit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yes that's what I was thinking also when I realised the the corresponding section was called "patching ....".
Probably a good idea to also add described-elsewhere
and use that for such cases, or perhaps even description=ltclass.dtx
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK, so perhaps leave these ones 'non-fixed' at the moment until we have a version of l3doc
that covers this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Agreed, might be better to change l3doc first, and also fix the missing \MaintainedBy stuff there and then update the 2e .dtx file (for the latter there is an open issue)
This PR has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. |
No description provided.