From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from simark.ca by simark.ca with LMTP id +mhgChwM/19dewAAWB0awg (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:05:00 -0500 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 174811EF80; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:05:00 -0500 (EST) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on simark.ca X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RDNS_NONE,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from sourceware.org (unknown [8.43.85.97]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD3EB1E940 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:04:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from server2.sourceware.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5744385783D; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:04:58 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org E5744385783D DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sourceware.org; s=default; t=1610550298; bh=NZ6bLoXClzWMQ3zUzWjbMa1JaqerqJAu3hHptZqhC1s=; h=Date:To:In-Reply-To:Subject:References:List-Id:List-Unsubscribe: List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe:From:Reply-To:Cc: From; b=w/BK/x77snxAthYxq6fgn6RSQ7MfpgQsVDQemzZcWeY9HJf1GXkAlUPgefeMpZ7wA 11cfPWGxp+E9Z7vn0v1gVl9iYfTLZl+O1n369cR+uy7im+hYCnGs65HEC4aWztEWNO CHeKFrQtoqVRKVtn6Wu9BgfKksgdIoqiAP75LgQU= Received: from eggs.gnu.org (eggs.gnu.org [IPv6:2001:470:142:3::10]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89295385783D for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 15:04:55 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 89295385783D Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:57587) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kzhhd-0004Fo-Ts; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:04:53 -0500 Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3329 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kzhha-0003M1-Uo; Wed, 13 Jan 2021 10:04:51 -0500 Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2021 17:04:49 +0200 Message-Id: <835z40dgj2.fsf@gnu.org> To: Andrew Burgess In-Reply-To: <20210112170115.GB265215@embecosm.com> (message from Andrew Burgess on Tue, 12 Jan 2021 17:01:15 +0000) Subject: Re: [PATCH] gdb/doc: reorder and group sections relating to aliases References: <20210112131829.3108184-1-andrew.burgess@embecosm.com> <83a6tedtzb.fsf@gnu.org> <20210112170115.GB265215@embecosm.com> X-BeenThere: gdb-patches@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gdb-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , From: Eli Zaretskii via Gdb-patches Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Errors-To: gdb-patches-bounces@sourceware.org Sender: "Gdb-patches" > Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2021 17:01:15 +0000 > From: Andrew Burgess > Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org > > > > - Move the section on default args to become a sub-section of the > > > 'Command Aliases' section, and rename this sub-section to just > > > 'Default Arguments'. > > > > This is fine, but you must also add a @menu in the parent section > > "Command Aliases", because otherwise at least some versions of > > makeinfo will barf or display a warning: the @menu is necessary for > > makeinfo to understand the structure of the nodes (which is UP of > > which) and generate the necessary links. > > How do you feel about using anchor instead of node? I'd prefer to have a node. > It feels weird to me to have sub-sections added into the @menu > blocks, but maybe that's just an issue on my side. It's fine to have such a menu. > Is there any advice or guidance you could give on how to choose > between node and anchor? I use @anchor only when I need to produce a cross-reference to a very long node, most of which is not related to the subject of the cross-reference. Nodes are better because they help navigating through the document, and you can arrive to nodes by means other than cross-references. > I'd also be interested in better understanding the differences > between these two, I read the manual but didn't feel enlightened. Basically, a node is also a section/subsection, whereas anchor isn't.