Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:52:55AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > ./gdb.texinfo:22939: warning: @table has text but no @item > > Why is this warning needed? This one is clear to me. A @table without @item does not make sense. A @table specifies a series of headings and associated texts, so a @table without @item has no reason to be. I don't think this warning should be ignored. Maybe use @group? Or @quotation? What are you searching for with those empty tables? > > ./gdb.texinfo:35330: warning: @item missing argument > > And this one? @table is for a succession of headings and text. An empty item means no heading and thus is not suitable. I agree that it may make sense as a separator, to control the presentation, but the general idea is that Texinfo should not be used as a presentational markup, but instead as a descriptive markup, hence this warning. You can always ignore that warning, though. > > ./gdb.texinfo:190: warning: @contents should only appear at beginning or > > end of document > > That @contents _is_ at the beginning. What's the issue here? It is not at the very beginning, instead, it appears at the end of the top node and element. At the beginning would mean before @node Top You can ignore this warning, though. -- Pat ___ bug-gdb mailing list bug-gdb@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:56:49AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:37:53 +0200
> > From: Patrice Dumas
> > Cc: Karl Berry
> >
> > ./gdb.texinfo:11503: warning: @strong{Note...} produces a spurious
> > cross-reference in Info
>
> No, it doesn't, not with a colon immediately following the "Note".
My testing shows that it indeed does, at least with info (GNU texinfo)
4.13.
*Note*: a trace experiment and data collection may stop
-Info: (gdb.info)Starting and Stopping Trace Experiments, 123 lines --10%--
Cannot find node `a trace experiment and data collection may stop automatically
--
Pat
___
bug-gdb mailing list
bug-gdb@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:50:29 +0200 > From: Patrice Dumas > Cc: bug-gdb@gnu.org, k...@freefriends.org > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:52:55AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > ./gdb.texinfo:22939: warning: @table has text but no @item > > > > Why is this warning needed? > > This one is clear to me. A @table without @item does not make sense. A > @table specifies a series of headings and associated texts, so a @table > without @item has no reason to be. I don't think this warning should be > ignored. Maybe use @group? Or @quotation? IMO, this is wrong in principle. It is not makeinfo's business to force style on the author of the manual. Warnings should only be emitted when the produced manual is in bad shape. This isn't such a case, so the warning is IMO gratuitous. If you want a pedantic mode (which could be a useful feature), please make it optional. > What are you searching for with those empty tables? Indentation and consistent format of describing GDB features. > > > ./gdb.texinfo:35330: warning: @item missing argument > > > > And this one? > > @table is for a succession of headings and text. An empty item means > no heading and thus is not suitable. It doesn't come out empty in the output. Did you look at that? It produces this: `' which stands for an empty response. If you know of any other way of getting the same in a @samp typeface, please tell. > I agree that it may make sense as a separator, to control the > presentation, but the general idea is that Texinfo should not be > used as a presentational markup, but instead as a descriptive > markup, hence this warning. Again, this is wrong philosophy. This warning should at least be turned off by default. > You can always ignore that warning, though. Extra noise runs the risk of obscuring real problems. > > > ./gdb.texinfo:190: warning: @contents should only appear at beginning or > > > end of document > > > > That @contents _is_ at the beginning. What's the issue here? > > It is not at the very beginning, instead, it appears at the end of the > top node and element. At the beginning would mean before > @node Top But the Texinfo manual documents no such restriction. It says only this: Both contents commands should be written on a line by themselves, and are best placed near the beginning of the file, after the `@end titlepage' (*note titlepage::). This is clearly an advisory, not a requirement. So I don't think a warning is called for. > You can ignore this warning, though. I don't want to ignore warnings. Please don't introduce warnings that should be ignored. ___ bug-gdb mailing list bug-gdb@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:58:57 +0200
> From: Patrice Dumas
> Cc: bug-gdb@gnu.org, k...@freefriends.org
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:56:49AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 22:37:53 +0200
> > > From: Patrice Dumas
> > > Cc: Karl Berry
> > >
> > > ./gdb.texinfo:11503: warning: @strong{Note...} produces a spurious
> > > cross-reference in Info
> >
> > No, it doesn't, not with a colon immediately following the "Note".
>
> My testing shows that it indeed does, at least with info (GNU texinfo)
> 4.13.
>
> *Note*: a trace experiment and data collection may stop
>
> -Info: (gdb.info)Starting and Stopping Trace Experiments, 123 lines
> --10%--
> Cannot find node `a trace experiment and data collection may stop
> automatically
Then perhaps the stand-alone Info reader should be fixed instead.
___
bug-gdb mailing list
bug-gdb@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:15:47PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:52:55AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > >
> > > > ./gdb.texinfo:22939: warning: @table has text but no @item
> > >
> > > Why is this warning needed?
> >
> > This one is clear to me. A @table without @item does not make sense. A
> > @table specifies a series of headings and associated texts, so a @table
> > without @item has no reason to be. I don't think this warning should be
> > ignored. Maybe use @group? Or @quotation?
>
> IMO, this is wrong in principle. It is not makeinfo's business to
> force style on the author of the manual. Warnings should only be
> emitted when the produced manual is in bad shape. This isn't such a
> case, so the warning is IMO gratuitous.
This warning was primarily done to help writers avoid mistakes, after a
user demand (if I recall well). As to whether this means that the
manual is in bad shape, I would be tempted to say that it is the case.
The presentation of the text appearing before the first @item could
be formatted differently from the text appearing after the first @item,
so you cannot rely on having the presentation you want in the future.
It could even be discarded, be considered as a 'meta-data' (the table
title?). This is left unspecified for now in the manual such that we
can give any meaning to this text in the future. Such text should not
be used in the mean time, in my opinion.
That being said, I agree with you that there is no easy way to have a
consistent presentation as @quotation that would be more logical, at
least in TeX leads to different left margin. Any idea, Karl?
> Indentation and consistent format of describing GDB features.
Ok.
> It doesn't come out empty in the output. Did you look at that? It
> produces this:
>
> `'
Indeed, I missed it.
> which stands for an empty response. If you know of any other way of
> getting the same in a @samp typeface, please tell.
There is, for example:
@item @w{}
However if the table is formatted with @asis, there is no output. In
that case, using, for instance, @w{ }, leads to a line passed. Having
this difference may not be optimal, though.
Should that be documented?
> > I agree that it may make sense as a separator, to control the
> > presentation, but the general idea is that Texinfo should not be
> > used as a presentational markup, but instead as a descriptive
> > markup, hence this warning.
>
> Again, this is wrong philosophy.
This is not a wrong philosophy, in my opinion this is the philosophy
behind Texinfo. I found that in the history of Texinfo (by chance):
A bit of history: in the 1970's at CMU, Brian Reid developed a program
and format named Scribe to mark up documents for printing. It used the
`@' character to introduce commands, as Texinfo does. Much more
consequentially, it strove to describe document contents rather than
formatting, an idea wholeheartedly adopted by Texinfo.
> This warning should at least be turned off by default.
I am not sure, as the output may not be what the writer intended.
Again, the empty @item line could either be ignored, or be considered as
an empty line depending on the formatter. The fact that empty @item
lines should not be used is not said in the manual, though.
> > You can always ignore that warning, though.
>
> Extra noise runs the risk of obscuring real problems.
Agreed.
> > > > ./gdb.texinfo:190: warning: @contents should only appear at beginning
> > > > or end of document
> > >
> > > That @contents _is_ at the beginning. What's the issue here?
> >
> > It is not at the very beginning, instead, it appears at the end of the
> > top node and element. At the beginning would mean before
> > @node Top
>
> But the Texinfo manual documents no such restriction. It says only
> this:
>
> Both contents commands should be written on a line by themselves, and
> are best placed near the beginning of the file, after the `@end
> titlepage' (*note titlepage::).
>
> This is clearly an advisory, not a requirement. So I don't think a
> warning is called for.
This has changed, now the text is:
Both contents commands should be written on a line by themselves, and
placed near the beginning of the file, after the @code{@@end
titlepage} (@pxref{titlepage,,@code{@@titlepage}}), before any
sectioning command. The contents commands automatically generate a
chapter-like heading at the top of the first table of contents page,
so don't include any sectioning command such as @code{@@unnumbered}
before them.
Maybe this could be clearer?
> > You can ignore this warning, though.
>
> I don't want to ignore warnings. Please don't introduce warnings that
> should be ignored.
There is a balance between having more warnings to warn users that have
made mistakes and having less warnings to let the user have more
freedom, and where the cursor is is mostly arbitrary: you'll always
help some users and piss off others. No
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:17:40PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > ./gdb.texinfo:11503: warning: @strong{Note...} produces a spurious
> > > > cross-reference in Info
> > >
> > > No, it doesn't, not with a colon immediately following the "Note".
> >
> > My testing shows that it indeed does, at least with info (GNU texinfo)
> > 4.13.
> >
> > *Note*: a trace experiment and data collection may stop
> >
> > -Info: (gdb.info)Starting and Stopping Trace Experiments, 123 lines
> > --10%--
> > Cannot find node `a trace experiment and data collection may stop
> > automatically
>
> Then perhaps the stand-alone Info reader should be fixed instead.
I don't think so. If I am not wrong, a colon means that there is a label
before the node name, but it still leads to a cross reference.
--
Pat
___
bug-gdb mailing list
bug-gdb@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:18:19 +0200
> From: Patrice Dumas
> Cc: bug-gdb@gnu.org, k...@freefriends.org
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:15:47PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 05:52:55AM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > ./gdb.texinfo:22939: warning: @table has text but no @item
> > > >
> > > > Why is this warning needed?
> > >
> > > This one is clear to me. A @table without @item does not make sense. A
> > > @table specifies a series of headings and associated texts, so a @table
> > > without @item has no reason to be. I don't think this warning should be
> > > ignored. Maybe use @group? Or @quotation?
> >
> > IMO, this is wrong in principle. It is not makeinfo's business to
> > force style on the author of the manual. Warnings should only be
> > emitted when the produced manual is in bad shape. This isn't such a
> > case, so the warning is IMO gratuitous.
>
> This warning was primarily done to help writers avoid mistakes, after a
> user demand (if I recall well).
That demand would be satisfied by an optional warning. E.g., like
with GCC's -Wfoo switches.
> As to whether this means that the manual is in bad shape, I would be
> tempted to say that it is the case.
Here's the output that "empty" table produces:
The following attributes are provided:
-- Variable: Value.address
If this object is addressable, this read-only attribute holds
a `gdb.Value' object representing the address. Otherwise,
this attribute holds `None'.
-- Variable: Value.is_optimized_out
This read-only boolean attribute is true if the compiler
optimized out this value, thus it is not available for
fetching from the inferior.
-- Variable: Value.type
The type of this `gdb.Value'. The value of this attribute is
a `gdb.Type' object (*note Types In Python::).
Do you see anything "bad shape" here? I don't.
> The presentation of the text appearing before the first @item could
> be formatted differently from the text appearing after the first @item,
> so you cannot rely on having the presentation you want in the future.
> It could even be discarded, be considered as a 'meta-data' (the table
> title?). This is left unspecified for now in the manual such that we
> can give any meaning to this text in the future.
If you make such backwards incompatible changes in behavior, people
will complain, and rightly so.
> > It doesn't come out empty in the output. Did you look at that? It
> > produces this:
> >
> > `'
>
> Indeed, I missed it.
>
> > which stands for an empty response. If you know of any other way of
> > getting the same in a @samp typeface, please tell.
>
> There is, for example:
>
> @item @w{}
How is an empty argument to @w any better than an empty @item? One
day someone might even decide that such empty arguments to @w "don't
make sense", and will produce a warning for that, too.
The GDB manual has been using this form for a very long time now. So
long that it could definitely be considered an established de-facto
practice.
> However if the table is formatted with @asis, there is no output.
That's true, but this is not an @asis table. If you want to limit
this warning to @asis, I'd be fine with that.
> Should that be documented?
Not sure what you suggest to document.
> > > I agree that it may make sense as a separator, to control the
> > > presentation, but the general idea is that Texinfo should not be
> > > used as a presentational markup, but instead as a descriptive
> > > markup, hence this warning.
> >
> > Again, this is wrong philosophy.
>
> This is not a wrong philosophy, in my opinion this is the philosophy
> behind Texinfo.
A user-friendly tool lets users do whatever they want, so long as the
result is to users' liking. If I learned anything from the days back
when I was hacking makeinfo, it's that users will use the tools in
every imaginable way and some unimaginable ones. Restricting them or
annoying them with gratuitous messages, without a very good reason, is
just annoyance.
> > This warning should at least be turned off by default.
>
> I am not sure, as the output may not be what the writer intended.
It is today.
> Again, the empty @item line could either be ignored, or be considered as
> an empty line depending on the formatter.
makeinfo never did such things, and IMO it never should.
> > > > > ./gdb.texinfo:190: warning: @contents should only appear at beginning
> > > > > or end of document
> > > >
> > > > That @contents _is_ at the beginning. What's the issue here?
> > >
> > > It is not at the very beginning, instead, it appears at the end of the
> > > top node and element. At the beginning would mean before
> > > @node Top
> >
> > But the Texinfo manual documents no such restriction. It says only
> > this:
> >
> > Both contents commands should be written on a line by themselves, and
> > are best placed n
Re: warnings with cvs texinfo version
> Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 19:24:51 +0200
> From: Patrice Dumas
> Cc: bug-gdb@gnu.org, k...@freefriends.org
>
> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 07:17:40PM +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > > > ./gdb.texinfo:11503: warning: @strong{Note...} produces a spurious
> > > > > cross-reference in Info
> > > >
> > > > No, it doesn't, not with a colon immediately following the "Note".
> > >
> > > My testing shows that it indeed does, at least with info (GNU texinfo)
> > > 4.13.
> > >
> > > *Note*: a trace experiment and data collection may stop
> > >
> > > -Info: (gdb.info)Starting and Stopping Trace Experiments, 123 lines
> > > --10%--
> > > Cannot find node `a trace experiment and data collection may stop
> > > automatically
> >
> > Then perhaps the stand-alone Info reader should be fixed instead.
>
> I don't think so. If I am not wrong, a colon means that there is a label
> before the node name, but it still leads to a cross reference.
That's true, but an asterisk '*' cannot be a valid label, and there
should be a blank after "*Note" before the label.
FWIW, the Emacs Info reader doesn't have any problems figuring out
that this isn't a cross-reference. So perhaps the stand-alone reader
should follow suit.
___
bug-gdb mailing list
bug-gdb@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gdb
