Re: @macro expansion bug

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > The same is true for the fact that e.g. after a plain `[' in
> > @deffn you have to use @var{} for variables or you get the wrong
> > font...
> 
> I didn't even know that, until you told it now.  I wonder if Karl 
> knew...

Yes :-)  I've complained about that earlier.

> In general, @def... directives are highly irregular in their use of
> the braces and the magic conversions they perform on their
> arguments.  Since these conversions are all specially written for
> this family of commands, some of the aspects of their behavior are
> next to impossible to grasp without experimenting, especially if you
> use special characters such as `[' and `{'.

The brace problem you mean is this?

  @deffn {foo bar} name arguments...

> IMHO, if you can suggest new commands that follow the Texinfo syntax
> and solve whatever problems you tried to solve with macros, it'd be
> easier to add these new commands to Texinfo than to fix the messy
> problems with macros.  (All of the non-messy problems with macros
> are already solved ;-)

It would be sufficient for me to have a working @deffn.

What about creating a variant of @deffn, say, @definition, which

  . is a regular texinfo function
  . follows the standard syntactical rules
  . works with macros
  . doesn't format its arguments?

People than have to say e.g.

  @definition @w{cate gory} name @var{arg1} address@hidden ...

BTW, which are the messy parts of macros (besides the @deffn
irregularities)?


    Werner