-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 268
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
Open
josephwright
wants to merge
1
commit into
develop
Choose a base branch
from
gh1214
base: develop
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+28
−22
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -10,6 +10,11 @@ not part of the distribution. | |
All changes above are only part of the development branch for the next release. | ||
================================================================================ | ||
|
||
2024-06-03 Joseph Wright <[email protected]> | ||
|
||
* ltfilehook.dtx, ltshipout.dtx | ||
Correct mark-up for commands with no documentation | ||
|
||
######################### | ||
# 2024-06-01 Release | ||
######################### | ||
|
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 inltfilehooks.dtx
, but that means there's no user documentation here - I guess we need a 'described elsewhere' marker but for the presentno-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 evendescription=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)